September 4
File:Phineas and Ferb Across the 1st and 2nd Dimensions soundtrack covers.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. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 06:01, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
- File:Phineas and Ferb Across the 1st and 2nd Dimensions soundtrack covers.jpg ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by J.Severe ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Non-free album cover being used in a decorative manner in Phineas and Ferb the Movie: Across the 2nd Dimension#Soundtrack. Non-free album cover art is generally allowed to be used for primary identification purposes in stand-alone articles about albums, but its use in other articles is generally only allowed when the cover art itself is the subject of sourced critical commentary as explained in WP:NFC#cite_note-3 and the context for non-free use required by WP:NFCC#8 is evident. There is no such commentary for this particular album cover anywhere in the article, and the use of soundtrack album cover art in articles about films or TV programs is generally not allowed for this reason as explained in WP:FILMSCORE. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 05:07, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- Delete - in addition to the nominating rationale, the image is a collage of two covers so it also violates WP:NFCC#3a.-- Whpq ( talk) 12:24, 4 September 2019 (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:Muhammad encountering the angel of fire and ice.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 as F8 by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 23:01, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
- File:Muhammad encountering the angel of fire and ice.jpg ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by VenusFeuerFalle ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
The source does not have a GFDL license. Requesting evaluation on whether or not The David Collection holds any copyright or if this is PD. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 06:03, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- Keep as {{ PD-art}} and transfer to Commons. Absolutely nothing copyrightable here. – Finnusertop ( talk ⋅ contribs) 08:52, 4 September 2019 (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:New Hampshire historical marker 173 in Lancaster.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. There is no evidence that the pictured prose is freely licensed, making the photograph a derivative of a non-free work, which is non-free. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 02:45, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
- File:New Hampshire historical marker 173 in Lancaster.jpg ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Dmoore5556 ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
possible derivative of non-free content; there is no FOP for 2D works in the US FASTILY 05:24, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- Keep. Photograph (the status/license of which is not being questioned) is of a historical marker (3D) erected by the State of New Hampshire along a public road. Akin to
this plaque on the Golden Gate bridge. The New Hampshire series of historical markers has also been photographed and published in other places (e.g. the book
Cruising New Hampshire History: A Guide to New Hampshire's Roadside Historical Markers and on
Waymarking.com).
Dmoore5556 (
talk)
06:00, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- Right, except this nomination is only concerned with the depicted text. Can you provide proof that the text is freely licensed? -
FASTILY
11:15, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- Not trying to be argumentative, but I don't understand your concern. It's a public sign on a public way, the epitome of putting something in the public domain.
Dmoore5556 (
talk)
16:10, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- No worries. This image contains a large paragraph of text which could be copyrighted, thereby making it a possible
derivative of non-free content (i.e. a
copyright violation). Unless the text written on the sign can be demonstrated to be freely licensed, this image cannot stay on Wikipedia with a cc-by-sa-2.0 license. -
FASTILY
04:27, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
- That clarification helps, thanks. Let me look into this further. Dmoore5556 ( talk) 06:02, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
- Update: the New Hampshire Division of Historical Resources (the agency responsible for the historical markers) has published photos of all markers (including their text) online via this site (said site is linked from https://www.nh.gov/nhdhr/markers/). The historical marker in question can be found as entry #10 in the Great North Woods Region (direct URL to the image is here). There is no indication of copyright, on the web pages or the photos. That said, I've emailed the Division of Historical Resources, seeking confirmation/clarification. Dmoore5556 ( talk) 04:28, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
- No worries. This image contains a large paragraph of text which could be copyrighted, thereby making it a possible
derivative of non-free content (i.e. a
copyright violation). Unless the text written on the sign can be demonstrated to be freely licensed, this image cannot stay on Wikipedia with a cc-by-sa-2.0 license. -
FASTILY
04:27, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
- Not trying to be argumentative, but I don't understand your concern. It's a public sign on a public way, the epitome of putting something in the public domain.
Dmoore5556 (
talk)
16:10, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- Right, except this nomination is only concerned with the depicted text. Can you provide proof that the text is freely licensed? -
FASTILY
11:15, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 08:08, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 08:08, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- The website of this museum itself licensed it for non-commercial usage, as long the Source is given. I also asked the Museum via Chat and they agreed, it can be used on Wikipedia (can give a screen-shot if necessary.)--
VenusFeuerFalle (
talk)
19:02, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
- NC licenses are forbidden on Wikipedia, see WP:CSD#F3; your statement just confirmed that this file is eligible for speedy deletion. - FASTILY 01:16, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
- The website of this museum itself licensed it for non-commercial usage, as long the Source is given. I also asked the Museum via Chat and they agreed, it can be used on Wikipedia (can give a screen-shot if necessary.)--
VenusFeuerFalle (
talk)
19:02, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
- Delete unless it's for that certain the sign itself is not eligible for copyright protection and even then only if the license for the photo is OTRS verified. "For non-commercial use only" and "For use on Wikipedia only" type of licenses aren't compatible with either WP:COPY or C:COM:L, so there's no way to keep any photos from the museum's website unless the museum/copyright holder basically agrees to WP:CONSENT or c:COM:CONSENT and emails Wikimedia OTRS clearly stating this. OTRS is never going to accept a screenshot/forwarded consent declaration made by the museum to a third-party from said third-party. So, either the museum changes the licensing of the photo(s) on its website or emails OTRS.If the sign is not eligible for copyright protection, then Wikipedia is never going to be able to keep any non-free licensed photos taken of it as non-free content per WP:FREER since anyone could basically take a similar photo and decide to release it under a free license. This is basically why the other files uploaded to Commons have probably not been given a closer look so far; they are licensed as personal photos, but more on that below. If the sign itself, however, is eligible for copyright protection, then it might be possible to keep the photos as non-free content as long as each of its uses on Wikipedia satisfies Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. The non-free content use policy is, however, very restrictive and it pretty much never allows non-free content to illustrate individual entries of list articles per WP:NFLISTS; so, as the file is currently being used, it hard to see how even the non-free use of this file can be seen as policy compliant and thus kept. It might be possible to justify non-free use if the file was being used at the top of or in the main infobox of an stand-alone article about the sign itself or maybe even about the highway, but there's pretty much no way to justify its use in List of New Hampshire historical markers (151–175)#173 Lake Coos and the Presidential Range; morover, if this sign is eligible for copyright protection, then most likely the other similar signs shown in the article are also eligible for copyright protection, which means they shouldn't be being hosted by Commons per c:COM:DW and need to be tagged with c:Template:dw-npd or discussed at c:COM:DR. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 22:33, 7 September 2019 (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.
- I am sorry I sliped in the paragraph. My comment was for the image above. i apologize for the inconvenience and am really really sorry.--
VenusFeuerFalle (
talk)
12:24, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
- To be very clear: the comment entered by VenusFeuerFalle in the discussion for File:New Hampshire historical marker 173 in Lancaster.jpg was actually meant to go in the discussion for File:Muhammad encountering the angel of fire and ice.jpg. There is no "website of this museum" associated with the historical marker in question. Dmoore5556 ( talk) 17:03, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
- @
JJMC89 and
Fastily: Since VenusFeuerFalle says that their post was added to this discussion by mistake, I'm wondering whether it might've affected the close or even whether the discussion probably should be cleaned up (strikethroughs, etc.) even if it didn't. FWIW, I would've only changed a few sentences (the comments about the NC license) of the first paragraph of my !vote if VenusFeuerFalle hadn't posted what they posted, but the rest would've be pretty much the same. --
Marchjuly (
talk)
21:46, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
- @
Marchjuly: Hi, that seems OK, I mainly didn't want anyone left with an inaccurate understanding that "For non-commercial use only" had been established. I'm again reaching out to the New Hampshire state agency responsible for the historical markers, hoping to get clarification from them directly. Thanks.
Dmoore5556 (
talk)
01:55, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
- And if you do happen to hear back, then please get in touch with OTRS to get the file restored. As it stands, the file is missing evidence of permission. - FASTILY 03:20, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
- I had discounted the comment since it is clear that there is no museum related to the marker. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 05:38, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
- @
Marchjuly: Hi, that seems OK, I mainly didn't want anyone left with an inaccurate understanding that "For non-commercial use only" had been established. I'm again reaching out to the New Hampshire state agency responsible for the historical markers, hoping to get clarification from them directly. Thanks.
Dmoore5556 (
talk)
01:55, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
File:Ds portrait.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. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 02:31, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
- File:Ds portrait.jpg ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Chamal N ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
unused low-res crop of File:PM visits the 1st Bn CLI.jpg, no obvious use FASTILY 23:39, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat ( talk) 06:03, 8 September 2019 (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:XEPRS-AM New 2015 Logo.jpg.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. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 02:31, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
- File:XEPRS-AM New 2015 Logo.jpg.png ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by JD2635 ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
unused, low-res, no obvious encyclopedic use FASTILY 23:40, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat ( talk) 06:03, 8 September 2019 (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:Lloyd Andrews Hamilton (1918).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
- 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. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 02:31, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- File:Lloyd Andrews Hamilton (1918).jpg ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Binksternet ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
.jpg&action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+discussion%2F2019+September+4%23File%3ALloyd+Andrews+Hamilton+%281918%29.jpg%5D%5D){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=history){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
unused, low-res, superior version available: File:Lieutenant Lloyd Andrews Hamilton, 17th Aero Squadron, US Air Service, 1918.tif FASTILY 23:42, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat ( talk) 06:03, 8 September 2019 (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:JoeBBrownJr.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. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 02:31, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
- File:JoeBBrownJr.jpg ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Rdewald ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
unused, low-res, no obvious encyclopedic use FASTILY 23:43, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat ( talk) 06:04, 8 September 2019 (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:Ricky Burns.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. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 02:31, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
- File:Ricky Burns.jpg ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Medic463 ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
unused, low-res, no obvious use FASTILY 23:44, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat ( talk) 06:04, 8 September 2019 (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:Example of a Trick Image.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. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 02:32, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
- File:Example of a Trick Image.png ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Brobra694 ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
unused, low-res, no obvious encyclopedic use FASTILY 23:48, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat ( talk) 06:04, 8 September 2019 (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:Jutte.gif
- 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. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 02:32, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
- File:Jutte.gif ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Hiro DynoSlayer ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
unused, low-res, no obvious use FASTILY 23:49, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat ( talk) 06:04, 8 September 2019 (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.
September 4
File:Phineas and Ferb Across the 1st and 2nd Dimensions soundtrack covers.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. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 06:01, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
- File:Phineas and Ferb Across the 1st and 2nd Dimensions soundtrack covers.jpg ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by J.Severe ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Non-free album cover being used in a decorative manner in Phineas and Ferb the Movie: Across the 2nd Dimension#Soundtrack. Non-free album cover art is generally allowed to be used for primary identification purposes in stand-alone articles about albums, but its use in other articles is generally only allowed when the cover art itself is the subject of sourced critical commentary as explained in WP:NFC#cite_note-3 and the context for non-free use required by WP:NFCC#8 is evident. There is no such commentary for this particular album cover anywhere in the article, and the use of soundtrack album cover art in articles about films or TV programs is generally not allowed for this reason as explained in WP:FILMSCORE. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 05:07, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- Delete - in addition to the nominating rationale, the image is a collage of two covers so it also violates WP:NFCC#3a.-- Whpq ( talk) 12:24, 4 September 2019 (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:Muhammad encountering the angel of fire and ice.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 as F8 by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 23:01, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
- File:Muhammad encountering the angel of fire and ice.jpg ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by VenusFeuerFalle ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
The source does not have a GFDL license. Requesting evaluation on whether or not The David Collection holds any copyright or if this is PD. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 06:03, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- Keep as {{ PD-art}} and transfer to Commons. Absolutely nothing copyrightable here. – Finnusertop ( talk ⋅ contribs) 08:52, 4 September 2019 (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:New Hampshire historical marker 173 in Lancaster.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. There is no evidence that the pictured prose is freely licensed, making the photograph a derivative of a non-free work, which is non-free. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 02:45, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
- File:New Hampshire historical marker 173 in Lancaster.jpg ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Dmoore5556 ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
possible derivative of non-free content; there is no FOP for 2D works in the US FASTILY 05:24, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- Keep. Photograph (the status/license of which is not being questioned) is of a historical marker (3D) erected by the State of New Hampshire along a public road. Akin to
this plaque on the Golden Gate bridge. The New Hampshire series of historical markers has also been photographed and published in other places (e.g. the book
Cruising New Hampshire History: A Guide to New Hampshire's Roadside Historical Markers and on
Waymarking.com).
Dmoore5556 (
talk)
06:00, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- Right, except this nomination is only concerned with the depicted text. Can you provide proof that the text is freely licensed? -
FASTILY
11:15, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- Not trying to be argumentative, but I don't understand your concern. It's a public sign on a public way, the epitome of putting something in the public domain.
Dmoore5556 (
talk)
16:10, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- No worries. This image contains a large paragraph of text which could be copyrighted, thereby making it a possible
derivative of non-free content (i.e. a
copyright violation). Unless the text written on the sign can be demonstrated to be freely licensed, this image cannot stay on Wikipedia with a cc-by-sa-2.0 license. -
FASTILY
04:27, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
- That clarification helps, thanks. Let me look into this further. Dmoore5556 ( talk) 06:02, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
- Update: the New Hampshire Division of Historical Resources (the agency responsible for the historical markers) has published photos of all markers (including their text) online via this site (said site is linked from https://www.nh.gov/nhdhr/markers/). The historical marker in question can be found as entry #10 in the Great North Woods Region (direct URL to the image is here). There is no indication of copyright, on the web pages or the photos. That said, I've emailed the Division of Historical Resources, seeking confirmation/clarification. Dmoore5556 ( talk) 04:28, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
- No worries. This image contains a large paragraph of text which could be copyrighted, thereby making it a possible
derivative of non-free content (i.e. a
copyright violation). Unless the text written on the sign can be demonstrated to be freely licensed, this image cannot stay on Wikipedia with a cc-by-sa-2.0 license. -
FASTILY
04:27, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
- Not trying to be argumentative, but I don't understand your concern. It's a public sign on a public way, the epitome of putting something in the public domain.
Dmoore5556 (
talk)
16:10, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- Right, except this nomination is only concerned with the depicted text. Can you provide proof that the text is freely licensed? -
FASTILY
11:15, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 08:08, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 08:08, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- The website of this museum itself licensed it for non-commercial usage, as long the Source is given. I also asked the Museum via Chat and they agreed, it can be used on Wikipedia (can give a screen-shot if necessary.)--
VenusFeuerFalle (
talk)
19:02, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
- NC licenses are forbidden on Wikipedia, see WP:CSD#F3; your statement just confirmed that this file is eligible for speedy deletion. - FASTILY 01:16, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
- The website of this museum itself licensed it for non-commercial usage, as long the Source is given. I also asked the Museum via Chat and they agreed, it can be used on Wikipedia (can give a screen-shot if necessary.)--
VenusFeuerFalle (
talk)
19:02, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
- Delete unless it's for that certain the sign itself is not eligible for copyright protection and even then only if the license for the photo is OTRS verified. "For non-commercial use only" and "For use on Wikipedia only" type of licenses aren't compatible with either WP:COPY or C:COM:L, so there's no way to keep any photos from the museum's website unless the museum/copyright holder basically agrees to WP:CONSENT or c:COM:CONSENT and emails Wikimedia OTRS clearly stating this. OTRS is never going to accept a screenshot/forwarded consent declaration made by the museum to a third-party from said third-party. So, either the museum changes the licensing of the photo(s) on its website or emails OTRS.If the sign is not eligible for copyright protection, then Wikipedia is never going to be able to keep any non-free licensed photos taken of it as non-free content per WP:FREER since anyone could basically take a similar photo and decide to release it under a free license. This is basically why the other files uploaded to Commons have probably not been given a closer look so far; they are licensed as personal photos, but more on that below. If the sign itself, however, is eligible for copyright protection, then it might be possible to keep the photos as non-free content as long as each of its uses on Wikipedia satisfies Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. The non-free content use policy is, however, very restrictive and it pretty much never allows non-free content to illustrate individual entries of list articles per WP:NFLISTS; so, as the file is currently being used, it hard to see how even the non-free use of this file can be seen as policy compliant and thus kept. It might be possible to justify non-free use if the file was being used at the top of or in the main infobox of an stand-alone article about the sign itself or maybe even about the highway, but there's pretty much no way to justify its use in List of New Hampshire historical markers (151–175)#173 Lake Coos and the Presidential Range; morover, if this sign is eligible for copyright protection, then most likely the other similar signs shown in the article are also eligible for copyright protection, which means they shouldn't be being hosted by Commons per c:COM:DW and need to be tagged with c:Template:dw-npd or discussed at c:COM:DR. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 22:33, 7 September 2019 (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.
- I am sorry I sliped in the paragraph. My comment was for the image above. i apologize for the inconvenience and am really really sorry.--
VenusFeuerFalle (
talk)
12:24, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
- To be very clear: the comment entered by VenusFeuerFalle in the discussion for File:New Hampshire historical marker 173 in Lancaster.jpg was actually meant to go in the discussion for File:Muhammad encountering the angel of fire and ice.jpg. There is no "website of this museum" associated with the historical marker in question. Dmoore5556 ( talk) 17:03, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
- @
JJMC89 and
Fastily: Since VenusFeuerFalle says that their post was added to this discussion by mistake, I'm wondering whether it might've affected the close or even whether the discussion probably should be cleaned up (strikethroughs, etc.) even if it didn't. FWIW, I would've only changed a few sentences (the comments about the NC license) of the first paragraph of my !vote if VenusFeuerFalle hadn't posted what they posted, but the rest would've be pretty much the same. --
Marchjuly (
talk)
21:46, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
- @
Marchjuly: Hi, that seems OK, I mainly didn't want anyone left with an inaccurate understanding that "For non-commercial use only" had been established. I'm again reaching out to the New Hampshire state agency responsible for the historical markers, hoping to get clarification from them directly. Thanks.
Dmoore5556 (
talk)
01:55, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
- And if you do happen to hear back, then please get in touch with OTRS to get the file restored. As it stands, the file is missing evidence of permission. - FASTILY 03:20, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
- I had discounted the comment since it is clear that there is no museum related to the marker. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 05:38, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
- @
Marchjuly: Hi, that seems OK, I mainly didn't want anyone left with an inaccurate understanding that "For non-commercial use only" had been established. I'm again reaching out to the New Hampshire state agency responsible for the historical markers, hoping to get clarification from them directly. Thanks.
Dmoore5556 (
talk)
01:55, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
File:Ds portrait.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. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 02:31, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
- File:Ds portrait.jpg ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Chamal N ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
unused low-res crop of File:PM visits the 1st Bn CLI.jpg, no obvious use FASTILY 23:39, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat ( talk) 06:03, 8 September 2019 (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:XEPRS-AM New 2015 Logo.jpg.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. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 02:31, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
- File:XEPRS-AM New 2015 Logo.jpg.png ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by JD2635 ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
unused, low-res, no obvious encyclopedic use FASTILY 23:40, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat ( talk) 06:03, 8 September 2019 (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:Lloyd Andrews Hamilton (1918).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. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 02:31, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
- File:Lloyd Andrews Hamilton (1918).jpg ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Binksternet ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
unused, low-res, superior version available: File:Lieutenant Lloyd Andrews Hamilton, 17th Aero Squadron, US Air Service, 1918.tif FASTILY 23:42, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat ( talk) 06:03, 8 September 2019 (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:JoeBBrownJr.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. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 02:31, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
- File:JoeBBrownJr.jpg ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Rdewald ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
unused, low-res, no obvious encyclopedic use FASTILY 23:43, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat ( talk) 06:04, 8 September 2019 (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:Ricky Burns.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. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 02:31, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
- File:Ricky Burns.jpg ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Medic463 ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
unused, low-res, no obvious use FASTILY 23:44, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat ( talk) 06:04, 8 September 2019 (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:Example of a Trick Image.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. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 02:32, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
- File:Example of a Trick Image.png ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Brobra694 ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
unused, low-res, no obvious encyclopedic use FASTILY 23:48, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat ( talk) 06:04, 8 September 2019 (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:Jutte.gif
- 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. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 02:32, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
- File:Jutte.gif ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Hiro DynoSlayer ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
unused, low-res, no obvious use FASTILY 23:49, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat ( talk) 06:04, 8 September 2019 (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.