Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2023 March 5



File:Matt Daniels White House press conference 2006.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. Whpq (talk) 12:13, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * File:Matt Daniels White House press conference 2006.png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by WhinyTheYounger ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Fails WP:NFCC since the guy is alive. CSPAN is sometimes ok on Commons, but apparently it's a bit complicated. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:53, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete - Does not meet fair use. With regards to commons, CSPAN footage of the proceedings of the Houses of US Congress are in the public domain. CSPAN footage of other things (political conventions, press conferences, expert panels, etc.) are copyrighted. This is not a still from a proceeding of Congress so it is copyrighted, so a valid fair use justification would be necessary if we were to keep it on en Wikipedia. -Indy beetle (talk) 19:50, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete — I'm the original uploader. I did not understand that the justification for WP:NFCC#1 fails because the subject is still living. Mea culpa. WhinyTheYounger (WtY) (talk, contribs)  23:14, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @WhinyTheYounger I think an argument like "is serving a life sentence in North Korea" can work, but afaict that's not the case here 😉 Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:51, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete. The image's only use fails the non-replacability criterion, and CSPAN's coverage in that context is both copyrighted and non-free. — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 18:13, 6 March 2023 (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:Preparing for Emergencies logo.svg

 * 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: convert to -  F ASTILY   01:48, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
 * File:Preparing for Emergencies logo.svg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Isochrone ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

This is probably below US TOO, so PD-ineligible-USOnly applies. The HM government logo's crown copyright has probably expired as well. --Matr1x-101$$^{Ping-me}_{when-replying}$$ { user page @ commons - talk - contribs }  16:42, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep local. Looking through the source file, there is a note that the content is "Crown Copyright 2004" on page 21. Unless there's evidence of prior publication (which I'm not quickly able to find, and I find unlikely given that Preparing for Emergencies was itself created in 2004), we'd have to presume the crown copyright to still be valid today. As for whether or not this is under TOO in the United States: it's less creative than this image, which c:COM:TOO USA lists as being copyrighted for reasons of creative arrangement, and I'd compare it to being of similar creativity to these two no soliciting signs, both of which have been granted copyright registration. As such, I think that we've probably got an image here that's above TOO; it's on the borderline, and a precautionary use as non-free seems warranted even if we were not sure. — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 18:25, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I never doubted that crown copyright exists. I'm saying it's below US TOO (but above UK TOO, so we can't move it to Commons). It's some text with a few generic icons; the UK HM government logo's copyright has probably long expired. This image you linked is quite informative, it's arrangement is quite creative. Same with the no-soliciting sign. This logo on the another hand, is a bunch of generic icons with not much creativity. --Matr1x-101$$^{Ping-me}_{when-replying}$$ { user page @ commons - talk - contribs }  17:38, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * It's just generic icons. --Matr1x-101$$^{Ping-me}_{when-replying}$$ { user page @ commons - talk - contribs }  21:45, 11 March 2023 (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.