Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 October 24



File:&

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  19:13, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * File:& ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Ritakat ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

tagged as OTRS permission insufficient for nearly a year; after reading through the ticket, I think it is unlikely permission will ever be confirmed  F ASTILY   03:22, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Calabi-Picker House.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  19:13, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * File:Calabi-Picker House.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Michaelphmccarty ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

tagged as OTRS permission insufficient for nearly a year; after reading through the ticket, I think it is unlikely permission will ever be confirmed  F ASTILY   03:24, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete, orphaned file with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 07:33, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Daniel (Danny) McFarlane.png

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  19:13, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * File:Daniel (Danny) McFarlane.png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Myosotis Scorpioides ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

tagged as OTRS permission insufficient for nearly a year; after reading through the ticket, I think it is unlikely permission will ever be confirmed  F ASTILY   03:30, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Emerging Sciences Foundation.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  19:13, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * File:Emerging Sciences Foundation.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by LaurenceHarker ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

unused logo, no foreseeable use  F ASTILY   03:31, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete, orphaned file with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 07:33, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete: Orphaned and with no foreseeable use. ToThAc (talk) 15:03, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Govy-artist.jpeg

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  19:13, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * File:Govy-artist.jpeg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Weirdrubikscube ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

tagged as OTRS permission insufficient for nearly a year; after reading through the ticket, I think it is unlikely permission will ever be confirmed  F ASTILY   03:33, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Peggy Fleming Doll.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  19:13, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * File:Peggy Fleming Doll.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Beltop1302 ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Per c:COM:TOYS, dolls and other toys, etc. are considered to be protected by copyright in the United States unless it can be clearly shown that they are "in the public domain in both the United States and in the source country of the toy". In this case, the uploader can release the photograph under a free license, but the copyright status of the doll needs to be taken intp account. According to Peggy Flemming, the doll was created by The Franklin Mint in 1988 which almost certainly means the doll is not old enough to be ineligible for copyright because of its age. So, the copyright of the doll is assumed to be held by The Franklin Mint unless in can clearly be show otherwise. Treating the doll as WP:NFC might possibly be an option if the image was used as the primary means of identification in a stand-laone article about the doll itself, but I don't see how the context for non-free use required by WP:NFCC is justified given the decorative way the file is being used in the Flemming article. Suggest delete if the doll imagery itself cannot clearly be shown to be in the public domain or released under a free license compatible with WP:COPY. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:23, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Priyam poster.png

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the discussion was: Relicense to non-free. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:24, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * File:Priyam poster.png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Arul selvan ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Doesn't seem to be uploader's own work. Uploader has history of such problems. David Biddulph (talk) 10:24, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Relicensed to non-free video cover and added a fairuse. Discussion should be good for closure. Salavat (talk) 07:32, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment: For some reason the uploader has started another FFD discussion about this at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 October 26. I think this was just a good-faith mistake made by someone who might not be familiar with how FFD discussions work. Perhaps someone can combine the discussions together since two ongoing FFD discussions about the same file are not really needed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:42, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The other discussion is about a non-existing JPG file, so the discussion was automatically closed by a bot. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:42, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section.

File:123 DVD Cover.png

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the discussion was: Relicense to non-free. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:25, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * File:123 DVD Cover.png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Arul selvan ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Obviously not uploader's own work. Presumably scan of published work. David Biddulph (talk) 10:27, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Relicensed to non-free video cover and added a fairuse. Discussion should be good for closure. Salavat (talk) 07:31, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment: For some reason the uploader has started another FFD discussion about this at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 October 26. I think this was just a good-faith mistake made by someone who might not be familiar with how FFD discussions work. Perhaps someone can combine the discussions together since two ongoing FFD discussions about the same file are not really needed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:40, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Not only does the uploader not understand how FFS discussions work, but he also does not understand how copyright works. At the discussion noted above he says "I bought a DVD for this movie and i scanned that DVD cover.So,I'm the copyright holder".  I have tried to explain, but he has taken no notice of numerous previous warnings about copyright. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:51, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Comments transferred across from incorrectly created 26 October discussion:
 * It was a DVD Cover of this movie and this image was widely used.I bought a DVD for this movie and i scanned that DVD cover.So,I'm the copyright holder Arul selvan (talk) 15:19, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * You need to understand that scanning the DVD cover does NOT make you the copyright holder. If you continue to violate copyright you are liable to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:50, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Sokkathangam vcd.jpeg

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the discussion was: Relicense to non-free. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:25, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * File:Sokkathangam vcd.jpeg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Arul selvan ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Obviously not uploader's own work. Presumably scan of published work. David Biddulph (talk) 10:28, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Relicensed to non-free video cover and added a fairuse. Discussion should be good for closure. Salavat (talk) 07:30, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment: For some reason the uploader has started another FFD discussion about this at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 October 26. I think this was just a good-faith mistake made by someone who might not be familiar with how FFD discussions work. Perhaps someone can combine the discussions together since two ongoing FFD discussions about the same file are not really needed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:39, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Added in below and closed the discussion from 26 October. Salavat (talk) 08:30, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment from uploader: It was a vcd cover of that movie and this image is widely used in other related things to this movie eg: An Audio cover and It was the model image.So,It will not come under already published Arul selvan (talk) 15:12, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Community Service Award.png

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  19:13, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * File:Community Service Award.png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Luis Santos24 ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Medal created by the government of an unidentified country. No evidence that this government's medals are in the public domain. Also no evidence that the photo of the medal is in the public domain. Stefan2 (talk) 19:36, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * According to the source the medal is from the Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps, a United States federal program sponsored by the United States Armed Forces. So it is possible it would fall under the public domain being either licensed as PD-USGov-Military-Award or a similar federal government public domain license.Salavat (talk) 07:20, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * That solves the copyright status of the medal, then. Per c:COM:ART, we also need permission from the photographer. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:44, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Summer Camp Participation Award.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  19:13, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * File:Summer Camp Participation Award.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Luis Santos24 ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Medal created by the government of an unidentified country. No evidence that this government's medals are in the public domain. Also no evidence that the photo of the medal is in the public domain. Stefan2 (talk) 19:36, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * According to the source the medal is from the Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps, a United States federal program sponsored by the United States Armed Forces. So it is possible it would fall under the public domain being either licensed as PD-USGov-Military-Award or a similar federal government public domain license. Salavat (talk) 07:20, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * That solves the copyright status of the medal, then. Per c:COM:ART, we also need permission from the photographer. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:44, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section.