The result of the discussion was: relisted on 2024 May 12. ✗ plicit 11:13, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:01, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Uploaded in 2016 as self-made, but appears to be a black-and-white screenshot of a 2012 YouTube video. hinnk ( talk) 03:46, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: keep. per Aspects
(non-admin closure) —Matrix(!) {
user -
talk? -
uselesscontributions}
16:43, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Image is not being used on infobox, it is rather being used at the bottom of the article to merely illustrate the first season. Thus fails
WP:NFCC8 as it isn't really contextually significant. —Matrix(!) {
user -
talk? -
uselesscontributions}
08:46, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: keep. per Aspects
(non-admin closure) —Matrix(!) {
user -
talk? -
uselesscontributions}
16:44, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Same reason as
Wikipedia:Files_for_discussion/2024_May_5#File:Nath_–_Zewar_Ya_Zanjeer_(title_card).jpg —Matrix(!) {
user -
talk? -
uselesscontributions}
08:51, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
This is, or appears to be, a picture of the uploader, but there is no evidence that the image is under an acceptable free licence. Ownership or possession of a photo, proprietorship of the equipment used to take the photo, or being the subject of the photo does not equate holding the copyright. The copyright holder is the photographer (i.e. the person who took the photo), rather than the subject (the person who appears in the photo) or the person possessing the photo, unless transferred by operation of law (e.g. inheritance, etc.) or by contract (written and signed by the copyright holder, and explicitly transfers the copyright). Evidence of any transfer of licencing must be sent via WP:VRT 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 09:25, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Image appears to be a slightly-cropped version of one used at this Radyo Veritas online article, dated January 27, 2024 (1:29 pm). Notice the orange-reddish effect at the far right edge that bears striking identical similarity to the original image online. Suspected copyvio. JWilz12345 ( Talk| Contrib's.) 09:53, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTFILESTORAGE: needless near-duplicate of File:Royce Hotel and Casino9.jpg. Redundant. Wikipedia is not Wikimedia Commons. JWilz12345 ( Talk| Contrib's.) 10:01, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTFILESTORAGE: needless near-duplicate of File:Royce Hotel and Casino9.jpg. Redundant. Wikipedia is not Wikimedia Commons. JWilz12345 ( Talk| Contrib's.) 10:01, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Derivative work of photographs that are surely post-1970s and are under their original photographers' copyrights. Uploader is not the photographer of the two photos here. Derivative work issue. JWilz12345 ( Talk| Contrib's.) 10:04, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Derivative work of photographs that are surely post-1970s and are under their original photographers' copyrights. Uploader is not the photographer of the three photos here. Derivative work issue. JWilz12345 ( Talk| Contrib's.) 10:07, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Copyrighted sculpture. The description itself speaks for itself: "The Redemption 1974 by Eduardo Castrillo". No FoP in the Philippines, and more so, violation of U.S. copyright law. Enwiki follows only U.S. FoP, but U.S. FoP does not extend to public monuments. Worse, it is caught by pre-1978 date for establishment of U.S. copyright over Philippine artistic works courtesy of Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA), and was still copyrighted on the URAA date for the Philippines (January 1, 1996). Copyvio, image should be deleted from English Wikipedia. Will remain under U.S. copyright for 95 more years (1974+95+1=January 1, 2070) JWilz12345 ( Talk| Contrib's.) 10:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: delete. Whpq ( talk) 03:39, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
2017 currency. See c:COM:CUR Pakistan. Magog the Ogre ( t • c) 13:28, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: delete. Whpq ( talk) 03:39, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
2005-series banknote. See c:COM:CUR Pakistan. Magog the Ogre ( t • c) 13:36, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Architectural photos uploaded by an employee of Ian Ritchie Architects (per User talk:Alex Johns#Ian Ritchie (architect), User talk:Alex Johns#Checking copyright status). One photo has a copyright notice in the description. Based on their talk page history the uploader has uploaded many other clear copyright violations, and these all seem to be photos copyrighted by the firm or photographer, which the employee does not have ability to release under a free license. Consigned ( talk) 14:41, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: keep. ✗ plicit 23:34, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NFCC: not discussed critically or needed for educational value, purely ornamental in the infobox, where there is already non-free media. ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 21:26, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: relisted on 2024 May 12. ✗ plicit 11:13, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:01, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Uploaded in 2016 as self-made, but appears to be a black-and-white screenshot of a 2012 YouTube video. hinnk ( talk) 03:46, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: keep. per Aspects
(non-admin closure) —Matrix(!) {
user -
talk? -
uselesscontributions}
16:43, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Image is not being used on infobox, it is rather being used at the bottom of the article to merely illustrate the first season. Thus fails
WP:NFCC8 as it isn't really contextually significant. —Matrix(!) {
user -
talk? -
uselesscontributions}
08:46, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: keep. per Aspects
(non-admin closure) —Matrix(!) {
user -
talk? -
uselesscontributions}
16:44, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Same reason as
Wikipedia:Files_for_discussion/2024_May_5#File:Nath_–_Zewar_Ya_Zanjeer_(title_card).jpg —Matrix(!) {
user -
talk? -
uselesscontributions}
08:51, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
This is, or appears to be, a picture of the uploader, but there is no evidence that the image is under an acceptable free licence. Ownership or possession of a photo, proprietorship of the equipment used to take the photo, or being the subject of the photo does not equate holding the copyright. The copyright holder is the photographer (i.e. the person who took the photo), rather than the subject (the person who appears in the photo) or the person possessing the photo, unless transferred by operation of law (e.g. inheritance, etc.) or by contract (written and signed by the copyright holder, and explicitly transfers the copyright). Evidence of any transfer of licencing must be sent via WP:VRT 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 09:25, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Image appears to be a slightly-cropped version of one used at this Radyo Veritas online article, dated January 27, 2024 (1:29 pm). Notice the orange-reddish effect at the far right edge that bears striking identical similarity to the original image online. Suspected copyvio. JWilz12345 ( Talk| Contrib's.) 09:53, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTFILESTORAGE: needless near-duplicate of File:Royce Hotel and Casino9.jpg. Redundant. Wikipedia is not Wikimedia Commons. JWilz12345 ( Talk| Contrib's.) 10:01, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOTFILESTORAGE: needless near-duplicate of File:Royce Hotel and Casino9.jpg. Redundant. Wikipedia is not Wikimedia Commons. JWilz12345 ( Talk| Contrib's.) 10:01, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Derivative work of photographs that are surely post-1970s and are under their original photographers' copyrights. Uploader is not the photographer of the two photos here. Derivative work issue. JWilz12345 ( Talk| Contrib's.) 10:04, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Derivative work of photographs that are surely post-1970s and are under their original photographers' copyrights. Uploader is not the photographer of the three photos here. Derivative work issue. JWilz12345 ( Talk| Contrib's.) 10:07, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Copyrighted sculpture. The description itself speaks for itself: "The Redemption 1974 by Eduardo Castrillo". No FoP in the Philippines, and more so, violation of U.S. copyright law. Enwiki follows only U.S. FoP, but U.S. FoP does not extend to public monuments. Worse, it is caught by pre-1978 date for establishment of U.S. copyright over Philippine artistic works courtesy of Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA), and was still copyrighted on the URAA date for the Philippines (January 1, 1996). Copyvio, image should be deleted from English Wikipedia. Will remain under U.S. copyright for 95 more years (1974+95+1=January 1, 2070) JWilz12345 ( Talk| Contrib's.) 10:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: delete. Whpq ( talk) 03:39, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
2017 currency. See c:COM:CUR Pakistan. Magog the Ogre ( t • c) 13:28, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: delete. Whpq ( talk) 03:39, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
2005-series banknote. See c:COM:CUR Pakistan. Magog the Ogre ( t • c) 13:36, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Architectural photos uploaded by an employee of Ian Ritchie Architects (per User talk:Alex Johns#Ian Ritchie (architect), User talk:Alex Johns#Checking copyright status). One photo has a copyright notice in the description. Based on their talk page history the uploader has uploaded many other clear copyright violations, and these all seem to be photos copyrighted by the firm or photographer, which the employee does not have ability to release under a free license. Consigned ( talk) 14:41, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: keep. ✗ plicit 23:34, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NFCC: not discussed critically or needed for educational value, purely ornamental in the infobox, where there is already non-free media. ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 21:26, 5 May 2024 (UTC)