The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:44, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
I am not sure that the uploader (who has not been active for almost 10 years) really intends to claim they are the original author of this 1965 work, which will still be copyrighted in the US at least until 2060. Felix QW ( talk) 10:12, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:44, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
This orphaned file seems to be (based on) a portrait of this subject, who died only in 1971. It is at least plausible that this image was first published in the Ukraine, and as Ukrainian copyright terms were 50 years at the URAA restoration date in 1996, it seems unlikely that this image is now PD in the US. Felix QW ( talk) 12:52, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons. Please nominate it for deletion there if you still feel it should be deleted. AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:10, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
Image is irrelevant because the subject isn't mentioned in the page itself MillieRoberts03 ( talk) 13:45, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
There is no evidence that the uploader is the copyright holder, that the copyright holder released this image into the public domain or that this image has ben published before 1979 without a copyright notice. It may be eligible for non-free use as a historic image, though. Felix QW ( talk) 14:30, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
I originally nominated this for F7 under "replaceable fair use"; however it got disputed by the original uploader. My original rationale was Can be described using almost exclusively text.
, the reason for the dispute was The rationale "Can be described using almost exclusively text" is true for almost any non-free image on Wikipedia, and isn't a valid rationale. It is one thing to simply claim that CNN broadcasted the term "shithole countries" but it would be impossible to cite a verifiable source. The image accomplishes the verifiability requirement of any statement we make on Wikipedia about the topic, in a way that "exclusively in text" fails to do. I searched for a long time and could not find a free version of any image of a news service reporting this. Therefore, there is no suitable visual replacement for something that demonstrate's CNN's or any other news service's use of this phrase.
. As gold as this image is in showing that cable news is not subject to FCC regulations, only OTA TV is; I am failing to see how this cannot be conveyed in text. I'd support editing to remove all but the headline then the image might be usable on Wikipedia with
c:De minimis or
c:Threshold of originality elements; and, failing that, deletion.
Awesome
Aasim 19:51, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:44, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
I am not sure that the uploader (who has not been active for almost 10 years) really intends to claim they are the original author of this 1965 work, which will still be copyrighted in the US at least until 2060. Felix QW ( talk) 10:12, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:44, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
This orphaned file seems to be (based on) a portrait of this subject, who died only in 1971. It is at least plausible that this image was first published in the Ukraine, and as Ukrainian copyright terms were 50 years at the URAA restoration date in 1996, it seems unlikely that this image is now PD in the US. Felix QW ( talk) 12:52, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons. Please nominate it for deletion there if you still feel it should be deleted. AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:10, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
Image is irrelevant because the subject isn't mentioned in the page itself MillieRoberts03 ( talk) 13:45, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
There is no evidence that the uploader is the copyright holder, that the copyright holder released this image into the public domain or that this image has ben published before 1979 without a copyright notice. It may be eligible for non-free use as a historic image, though. Felix QW ( talk) 14:30, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
I originally nominated this for F7 under "replaceable fair use"; however it got disputed by the original uploader. My original rationale was Can be described using almost exclusively text.
, the reason for the dispute was The rationale "Can be described using almost exclusively text" is true for almost any non-free image on Wikipedia, and isn't a valid rationale. It is one thing to simply claim that CNN broadcasted the term "shithole countries" but it would be impossible to cite a verifiable source. The image accomplishes the verifiability requirement of any statement we make on Wikipedia about the topic, in a way that "exclusively in text" fails to do. I searched for a long time and could not find a free version of any image of a news service reporting this. Therefore, there is no suitable visual replacement for something that demonstrate's CNN's or any other news service's use of this phrase.
. As gold as this image is in showing that cable news is not subject to FCC regulations, only OTA TV is; I am failing to see how this cannot be conveyed in text. I'd support editing to remove all but the headline then the image might be usable on Wikipedia with
c:De minimis or
c:Threshold of originality elements; and, failing that, deletion.
Awesome
Aasim 19:51, 21 March 2024 (UTC)