Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2018 October 5



File:Poly.pov

 * 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: No consensus on redirect, but consensus in favour of keeping it in some way. By the by one wonders if someone might succeed in persuading the developers into a server side upload to Commons. Something to seek consensus for on Commons, I guess. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:38, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
 * File:Poly.pov ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Cyp ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

unused (see WP:NOTWEBHOST), unsuitable file format for Wikipedia. Since this is just a text file, it should either go on Github or be copied to a page in the Wikipedia namespace  F ASTILY   01:31, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep or redirect to User:Cyp/Poly.pov (yes I know this is cross name space but I believe we can make an exception here). This file routinely goes through a delete/restore cycle; when it is deleted, it is restored by request on WP:REFUND, as the nominator already knows. It isn't "unused", it's being used on multiple reference desk pages, as can be seen if you click on "what links here". Here are the WP:REFUND archives:
 * Requests for undeletion/Archive 95
 * Requests for undeletion/Archive 311
 * Requests for_undeletion/Archive 253 (lengthy discussion)
 * Either redirect it or leave it alone. The reference desk links should be reason enough to keep at least a redirect. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:01, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:18, 27 September 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Redirect to User:Cyp/Poly.pov per (sorry for the wrong ping, Jo-Jo) . I can't see any harm doing that. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 06:39, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Finnusertop. UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:44, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Good grief please don't redirect a file into user space. Nothing about that makes any sense.  Honestly, if people are using it (and it sounds like they are), I don't see any real reason not to keep it.  I'm not clear on why the user page isn't sufficient, but clearly there are people who find the file useful so keep.  But good grief, a redirect from file space into user space is a bad precedent and is just asking to break things.   (For that matter, it's subject to speedy deletion under F2.) --B (talk) 20:06, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:55, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
 * WP:IAR doesn't set precedence. It's especially for exceptions like this. And besides, there is no "rule" being broken by the proposed redirect, only tradition. WP:R2 is irrelevant; that applies only to cross-space redirects from mainspace to other spaces. In fact, WP:MAINSPACE specifically excludes the File space from mainspace, so R2 would never apply to this redirect. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:03, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
 * F2, not R2. I'm not sure what IAR has to do with it.  IAR only concerns when the rules keep you from improving Wikipedia, but what we're discussing here is whether or not, in fact, this redirect would actually be an improvement.  I contend that it would not be and that it would only serve to break various database reports and the like, while not actually helping anybody anywhere. --B (talk) 18:10, 5 October 2018 (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:Bible Hill Crest.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) 09:39, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
 * File:Bible Hill Crest.png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by 718 Bot ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

This was seemingly also uploaded to commons, by a user name that suggests a link with the organisation represented. Was there an OTRS ticket associated with that upload? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:17, 19 September 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:20, 27 September 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment: I've asked for help at OTRS noticeboard. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 06:49, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't see an OTRS ticket. (OTRS search is awful.) —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 02:13, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:57, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
 * As a general rule, companies/organizations aren't going to deliberately license their logos under a free content license and if someone purports to do so, we ought to have more than just the say so of a user with a name that sounds similar to the organization. This account could be a member of the organization, a fan, etc, and not someone actually authorized to speak for them.  To accept the license for the logo, we ought to have an OTRS ticket validating the license in which the person demonstrates a clear understanding of what they are doing.  So I would say delete the Commons one and keep this one.  I have tagged the Commons one with {{subst:npd}}. --B (talk) 02:13, 12 October 2018 (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:Vignelli NYC Subway map 2008.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: relisted on. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:39, 13 October 2018 (UTC)


 * File:Vignelli NYC Subway map 2008.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs])


 * File:Vignelli 1972.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs])
 * 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:Tone mark comparative chart.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 ⚡  11:05, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
 * File:Tone mark comparative chart.png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Menchi ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

unused, can be represented by wikitext, no foreseeable use  F ASTILY   07:33, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 13:24, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.</b> 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.

Images by Garkeith
<div class="boilerplate ffd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color:#f3f9ff; margin:1em 0 0 0; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #aaa;">
 * 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 - F ASTILY   06:55, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
 * File:Countryclub.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Garkeith ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).
 * File:FortNewSalem.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs])
 * File:FortNewSalem2.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs])
 * File:FortNewSalem3.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs])
 * File:Marcus vick.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs])
 * File:Todd sauerbrun.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs])
 * File:Davisson-brothers.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs])
 * File:Joe DeForest.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs])
 * File:Marcus vick.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs])
 * File:Todd sauerbrun.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs])
 * File:Davisson-brothers.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs])
 * File:Joe DeForest.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs])
 * File:Davisson-brothers.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs])
 * File:Joe DeForest.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs])
 * File:Joe DeForest.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs])

Most of this user's uploads here and at Commons have been deleted as copyvios so it is difficult to accept these remaining images as valid. There are a variety of web-resolution images and images with either no EXIF data or various and sundry cameras. See also c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:CoveredBridgeSimpsonCreek2.jpg B (talk) 18:12, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.