The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
advert/promotional image, dubious self-work claim FASTILY 01:20, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
unused promotional image, unencyclopedic, dubious self-work claim (see watermarks) FASTILY 05:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
unused, no encyclopedic use FASTILY 05:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
looks like a video screenshot, dubious self-work claim FASTILY 05:01, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
missing verifiable source information and evidence of permission FASTILY 05:02, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
unused, no encyclopedic use FASTILY 05:03, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
unused, no encyclopedic use FASTILY 05:04, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
possible copyvio Jon Kolbert ( talk) 05:37, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
I would not be so harsh on a route marker file if it weren't so inaccurate. Mexican state highway shields have their own shape, separate from the federal ones (such as File:Sonora 40.svg). This would not be an actual road sign in use in any Mexican state. Raymie ( t • c) 08:02, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
too low in quality to be of any good use Jon Kolbert ( talk) 08:20, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
unneeded graphic Jon Kolbert ( talk) 08:28, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
orphaned diagram with watermark that makes content unreadable Jon Kolbert ( talk) 13:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
watermark makes image unusable in articles Jon Kolbert ( talk) 13:27, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
watermark makes image unusable in articles Jon Kolbert ( talk) 13:27, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
watermark makes image unusable in articles Jon Kolbert ( talk) 13:28, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. No consensus to reduce in resolution. There is a valid argument against resizing in that doing so would make relevant detail disappear. Sandstein 08:30, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Querying whether this non-free image should be a lower resolution. It has been reduced by bot but reverted multiple times. I believe it shouldn't be stored at a much higher resolution than how it's used in the article itself to ensure it's covered by fair use. ~ Rob13 Talk 15:20, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
I've implemented a 600² pixel image because every song on that album has an individual representational element in the album cover. It's a very busy piece of art and, despite having owned a copy since the early 1990s, even I can't quickly or easily find each song's place with the " MAD Magazine-like drawing style." — fourthords | =Λ= | 20:01, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Whether you do or don't personally know of any disputed reduced album covers isn't really salient.
Lastly, is it written somewhere that clicking on an image to see it duly enlarged isn't an aspect of the encyclopedia? Is clicking on media for enlarging or reading about their source considered an editor-only action not pertinent to readers? I really don't know; it's never occurred to me. — fourthords | =Λ= | 23:02, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
2.5 versions of CC-licenses have never been avalible on Flickr. The file is now delete on Flickr (or at least a bad link). No evience of which license it ever was licensed under. ( t) Josve05a ( c) 16:41, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Also:
Unused non-free mislicensed files. XXN, 16:52, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Tagging as "No evidence of permission". Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:34, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
unused studio portrait, dubious self-work claim FASTILY 06:46, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. It remains unclear whether this image is public domain or fair use, but there is no argument here for why it should be deleted. Sandstein 08:35, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
https://dc.gov/page/terms-and-conditions-use suggests that if this was produced by the council, it may fall under a free license. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 15:19, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: relisted on 2017 June 29. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:36, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
possible non-free album cover Jon Kolbert ( talk) 19:35, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
I suspect this was copied from a non-free web source, given the size and lack of metadata. Jon Kolbert ( talk) 19:39, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Uploader is claiming to be the copyright holder. However, the EXIF shows the copyright holder as Blythe Thomas. We would need OTRS confirmation that the uploader is indeed the copyright holder. Whpq ( talk) 19:48, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
no clear source Jon Kolbert ( talk) 19:50, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
orphaned file with no clear usability on project Jon Kolbert ( talk) 19:59, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
the filter on this makes it unencyclopedic Jon Kolbert ( talk) 20:07, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: delete. Until evidence of freeness is forthcoming Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:36, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
Likely Flickr wash and missing evidence of permission. See also: c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mosaics flies flowers.png FASTILY 21:18, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: delete. Copyright violation (unattributed derivative image). Sandstein 08:33, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
orphaned image, no clear encyclopedic value Jon Kolbert ( talk) 21:47, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: delete. The one "keep" opinion is not credible, as the image purports to be of the ingredients of a "flu cure" invented by the uploader, and depicts a package of flu medicine and some alcoholic beverages. Clearly this is not going to be useful in illustrating an article about actual medicine. Sandstein 08:38, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
orphaned image, no clear encyclopedic value, WP:NOTWEBHOST Jon Kolbert ( talk) 21:53, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Magog the Ogre ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Looks like only shapes and solid colors. Probably is considered free in the United States per {{ PD-logo}}. Steel1943 ( talk) 22:02, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F9 by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
orphaned file with no clear usability on project. - probable copyvio Jon Kolbert ( talk) 23:21, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
advert/promotional image, dubious self-work claim FASTILY 01:20, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
unused promotional image, unencyclopedic, dubious self-work claim (see watermarks) FASTILY 05:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
unused, no encyclopedic use FASTILY 05:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
looks like a video screenshot, dubious self-work claim FASTILY 05:01, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
missing verifiable source information and evidence of permission FASTILY 05:02, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
unused, no encyclopedic use FASTILY 05:03, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
unused, no encyclopedic use FASTILY 05:04, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
possible copyvio Jon Kolbert ( talk) 05:37, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
I would not be so harsh on a route marker file if it weren't so inaccurate. Mexican state highway shields have their own shape, separate from the federal ones (such as File:Sonora 40.svg). This would not be an actual road sign in use in any Mexican state. Raymie ( t • c) 08:02, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
too low in quality to be of any good use Jon Kolbert ( talk) 08:20, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
unneeded graphic Jon Kolbert ( talk) 08:28, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
orphaned diagram with watermark that makes content unreadable Jon Kolbert ( talk) 13:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
watermark makes image unusable in articles Jon Kolbert ( talk) 13:27, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
watermark makes image unusable in articles Jon Kolbert ( talk) 13:27, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
watermark makes image unusable in articles Jon Kolbert ( talk) 13:28, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. No consensus to reduce in resolution. There is a valid argument against resizing in that doing so would make relevant detail disappear. Sandstein 08:30, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Querying whether this non-free image should be a lower resolution. It has been reduced by bot but reverted multiple times. I believe it shouldn't be stored at a much higher resolution than how it's used in the article itself to ensure it's covered by fair use. ~ Rob13 Talk 15:20, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
I've implemented a 600² pixel image because every song on that album has an individual representational element in the album cover. It's a very busy piece of art and, despite having owned a copy since the early 1990s, even I can't quickly or easily find each song's place with the " MAD Magazine-like drawing style." — fourthords | =Λ= | 20:01, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Whether you do or don't personally know of any disputed reduced album covers isn't really salient.
Lastly, is it written somewhere that clicking on an image to see it duly enlarged isn't an aspect of the encyclopedia? Is clicking on media for enlarging or reading about their source considered an editor-only action not pertinent to readers? I really don't know; it's never occurred to me. — fourthords | =Λ= | 23:02, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
2.5 versions of CC-licenses have never been avalible on Flickr. The file is now delete on Flickr (or at least a bad link). No evience of which license it ever was licensed under. ( t) Josve05a ( c) 16:41, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Also:
Unused non-free mislicensed files. XXN, 16:52, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Tagging as "No evidence of permission". Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:34, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
unused studio portrait, dubious self-work claim FASTILY 06:46, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. It remains unclear whether this image is public domain or fair use, but there is no argument here for why it should be deleted. Sandstein 08:35, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
https://dc.gov/page/terms-and-conditions-use suggests that if this was produced by the council, it may fall under a free license. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 15:19, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: relisted on 2017 June 29. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:36, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
possible non-free album cover Jon Kolbert ( talk) 19:35, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
I suspect this was copied from a non-free web source, given the size and lack of metadata. Jon Kolbert ( talk) 19:39, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Uploader is claiming to be the copyright holder. However, the EXIF shows the copyright holder as Blythe Thomas. We would need OTRS confirmation that the uploader is indeed the copyright holder. Whpq ( talk) 19:48, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
no clear source Jon Kolbert ( talk) 19:50, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
orphaned file with no clear usability on project Jon Kolbert ( talk) 19:59, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
the filter on this makes it unencyclopedic Jon Kolbert ( talk) 20:07, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: delete. Until evidence of freeness is forthcoming Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:36, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
Likely Flickr wash and missing evidence of permission. See also: c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mosaics flies flowers.png FASTILY 21:18, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: delete. Copyright violation (unattributed derivative image). Sandstein 08:33, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
orphaned image, no clear encyclopedic value Jon Kolbert ( talk) 21:47, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: delete. The one "keep" opinion is not credible, as the image purports to be of the ingredients of a "flu cure" invented by the uploader, and depicts a package of flu medicine and some alcoholic beverages. Clearly this is not going to be useful in illustrating an article about actual medicine. Sandstein 08:38, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
orphaned image, no clear encyclopedic value, WP:NOTWEBHOST Jon Kolbert ( talk) 21:53, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Magog the Ogre ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Looks like only shapes and solid colors. Probably is considered free in the United States per {{ PD-logo}}. Steel1943 ( talk) 22:02, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F9 by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
orphaned file with no clear usability on project. - probable copyvio Jon Kolbert ( talk) 23:21, 17 April 2017 (UTC)