March 31
File:InsideChini Ka Roza.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 by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- File:InsideChini Ka Roza.jpg ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Amolakh ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Low quality unused file with no foreseeable use on Commons. Better off deleted. Anarchyte ( talk • work) 13:31, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- Delete. Plus that it is not used in any article anyway. werldwayd ( talk) 19:34, 31 March 2021 (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.
Other cover arts of Ain't Nobody
- 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 2021 May 10. FASTILY 23:33, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- File:Aint-Nobody-(Loves-Me-Better)-Felix-Jaehn.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.
-Felix-Jaehn.jpg){kind=link}
-Felix-Jaehn.jpg&action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+discussion%2F2021+March+31%23File%3AAint-Nobody-%28Loves-Me-Better%29-Felix-Jaehn.jpg%5D%5D){kind=link}
-Felix-Jaehn.jpg){kind=link}
-Felix-Jaehn.jpg&action=history){kind=link}
-Felix-Jaehn.jpg){kind=link}
File:ISIL fighters in Palma.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 Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- File:ISIL fighters in Palma.png ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Applodion ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Fair use rationale fails non-free content criteria, particularly 'Respect for
commercial opportunities' as the uploader asserts "the owner of the photograph is a terrorist organization which has no legal copyright in the first place". I am not aware of any such exceptions in the US copyright law in regards to organisations designated as 'Foreign Terrorist Organization'. It is likely that the person who took this photo is an ISIS/Daesh militant, who is paid for their 'services' thus this photo likely falls under the 'work for hire' provisions and the copyright owner is Amaq News Agency or perhaps ISIS/Daesh directly.
It is my understanding that photos from news agencies automatically fail non-free content criteria unless the photo itself is the subject of the article/commentary, which does not appear to be the case here.
Melmann 21:55, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- Amaq News, the publisher of the original image, is part of ISIL. It is not a regular news agency in any way, and should not be treated as such; it is a propaganda division. The question of ISIL's copyright is difficult to assess, as the organization rejects states as Iraq and Syria, meaning that it is difficult to assess which copyright rules actually apply. That's what was meant here. Regardless, the main reason for the image falling under fair use is the fact that it shows a historic event, is discussed in the article, and that basically no images exist of the battle, least of all free ones. Applodion ( talk) 00:05, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- Delete per the nom. This clearly falls under the work for hire provision mentioned by Melmann. It also serves no real purpose in illustrating the article - it's a poor-quality photo of a random group of people, and the photo itself it not the discussion of the article. Until a free work is found, the article should just have no image. — Amakuru ( talk) 08:58, 1 April 2021 (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:Swepirate graph.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 as G7 by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- File:Swepirate graph.png ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by EditorInTheRye ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Outdated and orphaned image that can't be updated anymore due to lack of source data. Also contained unnecessary detail not as relevant to article some 10+ years later EditorInTheRye ( talk) 22:13, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- Comment I should add, this was part of the Pirate Party (Sweden) article, and text more than adequately explains the points at which the party gained membership during its early years. EditorInTheRye ( talk) 22:16, 31 March 2021 (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.
March 31
File:InsideChini Ka Roza.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 by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- File:InsideChini Ka Roza.jpg ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Amolakh ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Low quality unused file with no foreseeable use on Commons. Better off deleted. Anarchyte ( talk • work) 13:31, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- Delete. Plus that it is not used in any article anyway. werldwayd ( talk) 19:34, 31 March 2021 (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.
Other cover arts of Ain't Nobody
- 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 2021 May 10. FASTILY 23:33, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- File:Aint-Nobody-(Loves-Me-Better)-Felix-Jaehn.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:ISIL fighters in Palma.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 Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- File:ISIL fighters in Palma.png ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Applodion ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Fair use rationale fails non-free content criteria, particularly 'Respect for
commercial opportunities' as the uploader asserts "the owner of the photograph is a terrorist organization which has no legal copyright in the first place". I am not aware of any such exceptions in the US copyright law in regards to organisations designated as 'Foreign Terrorist Organization'. It is likely that the person who took this photo is an ISIS/Daesh militant, who is paid for their 'services' thus this photo likely falls under the 'work for hire' provisions and the copyright owner is Amaq News Agency or perhaps ISIS/Daesh directly.
It is my understanding that photos from news agencies automatically fail non-free content criteria unless the photo itself is the subject of the article/commentary, which does not appear to be the case here.
Melmann 21:55, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- Amaq News, the publisher of the original image, is part of ISIL. It is not a regular news agency in any way, and should not be treated as such; it is a propaganda division. The question of ISIL's copyright is difficult to assess, as the organization rejects states as Iraq and Syria, meaning that it is difficult to assess which copyright rules actually apply. That's what was meant here. Regardless, the main reason for the image falling under fair use is the fact that it shows a historic event, is discussed in the article, and that basically no images exist of the battle, least of all free ones. Applodion ( talk) 00:05, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- Delete per the nom. This clearly falls under the work for hire provision mentioned by Melmann. It also serves no real purpose in illustrating the article - it's a poor-quality photo of a random group of people, and the photo itself it not the discussion of the article. Until a free work is found, the article should just have no image. — Amakuru ( talk) 08:58, 1 April 2021 (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:Swepirate graph.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 as G7 by Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- File:Swepirate graph.png ( delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by EditorInTheRye ( notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Outdated and orphaned image that can't be updated anymore due to lack of source data. Also contained unnecessary detail not as relevant to article some 10+ years later EditorInTheRye ( talk) 22:13, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- Comment I should add, this was part of the Pirate Party (Sweden) article, and text more than adequately explains the points at which the party gained membership during its early years. EditorInTheRye ( talk) 22:16, 31 March 2021 (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.