Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 September 11

< September 10	September 12 >

September 11

File:Virginia Military Institute (logo).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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:11, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned PD image; replaced by File:Virginia Military Institute full logo.png. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 03:17, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Dalmenyhouselightened.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 - unused and available on Commons i bith the original and lightened versions Nthep (talk) 15:53, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused derivative work of File:Dalmenyhouse.jpg in obsolete format. Also incorrectly licensed; original photographer did not release into the public domain. Delete per WP:NOTWEBHOST. Kelly ^hi! 08:20, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as deleting this image will break old revisions of articles that used this title until recently changed by the nominator. We have plenty of server capacity, so there's no reason not to keep images used in old revisions of articles. License should be fixed to match original, but this is a free image. WJBscribe (talk) 23:39, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete With all due respect to WJBscribe, that rationale makes zero sense. So if an image was used anywhere, on any article, at any time in the past, we should keep it around just to preserve the history of the article? Files that are obsolete get deleted. That is one of the purposes of FFD. Server space is irrelevant as well (we have enough of that to keep everything and the file isn't wiped from the server anyways, just hidden from view). --Majora (talk) 20:59, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Majora: Just because you disagree with something doesn't mean it makes no sense. We disagree on the purpose of FFD apparently, but "Files that are obsolete get deleted" isn't a reason or an argument, it's just a statement of practice. In answer to your questions- yes, if a free "image was used anywhere, on any article, at any time in the past, we should keep it around ... to preserve the history of the article". As we agree that server space isn't an issue, why delete free images? Wouldn't it be better to keep them to preserve the article histories? What is the benefit of deleting them - how does it make Wikipedia better? WJBscribe (talk) 18:02, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@WJBscribe: I don't see how that would be a good idea. Again, all someone would have to do is place the image, somewhere, on any article, and it would be forever preserved? Removing an image doesn't affect article histories. It leaves a redlink, sure, but it doesn't affect the text of the article in any way. Besides, this particular one has already been preserved. On Commons. The English Wikipedia does not need an additional copy and even if it was deleted, the image will actually still be in the article's history since it is named the same on Commons. The English Wikipedia should not have free images that are free both in their home country and in the US. That is the purpose of Commons. Commons should have this image and Commons does. There is no point in us keeping it here. --Majora (talk) 17:29, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Clumber chapel.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 -unused and available in other formats on Commons Nthep (talk) 15:53, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, obsolete format. Superseded by File:Clumber chapel.png and other files in Commons:Category:Saint Mary Church (Clumber Park). Delete per WP:NOTWEBHOST. Kelly ^hi! 08:29, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Was this image previously in articles? If so, it should be kept to preserve the history of any such article. WJBscribe (talk) 23:41, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Obsolete file. --Majora (talk) 21:00, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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 Hollow Live Photo.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:11, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Watermarked, uploader seems to claim to represent the band. I think we need OTRS evidence of permission. Kelly ^hi! 08:32, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Ccww.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:11, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be a noncommercial license. Kelly ^hi! 08:34, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Cdaughertyjr2012.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:11, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 08:38, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Cert KK.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:11, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused, probably non-free. Kelly ^hi! 08:54, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Picture playhouse.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:11, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently a frame from a film. Kelly ^hi! 08:57, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Charice.jpeg

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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:11, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, unused personal photo. Kelly ^hi! 10:00, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Charles Augustus Fitzroy Fitzsimons' grave.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:11, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - orphaned from deleted article. Kelly ^hi! 10:02, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:PHTO0005.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:11, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused, blurry. Clearer photos in Commons:Category:St Michael's church, Chart Sutton. Kelly ^hi! 10:08, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Newport Murals1.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: do not move to Commons czar 06:47, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this work falls under freedom of panorama for the United Kingdom, as it contains more than simple 2D elements and I believe it would be considered a work of artistic craftsmanship. Wanted to submit for community opinion before copying to Commons. Kelly ^hi! 10:38, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Don't move to commons. Tag as FOP-USonly Murals are specifically excluded in commons:Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#United_Kingdom, and I don't think this meets one of the listed acceptable "works of artistic craftsmanship" Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 00:08, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hard to tell the composition from the image alone—tiles and carvings?—but it's likely that the author could have been an artist and not a craftsman (we would need more info on its authorship). Until then, the decision to not move to Commons as a 2D work unprotected by FoP is sound. czar 06:47, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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:Trevor Jones.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Person who only died a few days ago, but no evidence of any attempt at trying and failing to locate a free image of a public figure at the article talk page. MASEM (t) 10:53, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded the image and posted nothing on the article talkpage. Instead I completed the use rational on the file page by responding to the question "Not replaceable with free media because" with the evidence of "none available via an internet search" as required. That should be interpreted as me doing the searching. How recently the individual died is irrelevant to this process. Graemp (talk) 11:15, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Number 10 of WP:NFCI says "Pictures of deceased persons, in articles about that person, provided that ever obtaining a free close substitute is not reasonably likely". Are you claiming that uploading a non-free image the day after Jones died, even if a search online for a free image came up empty, means that a free close substitute is not reasonably likely? There seem to be number of images out there of Jones and it seems fair to assume that he has been photographed quite a bit over the years. Is it fair to assume (after only a few days since his death) that a freely licensed equivalent is unlikely to ever be created? I don't think the intent of the NFCC in such cases is for a non-free image to serve as a placeholder until a freely licensed image is found; a non-free image like this should be only used when reasonable attempts to find a freely licensed image have been exhausted.

Regarding this specific image, it's also unclear how you determined the date of original publication as 1974 when that doesn't seem to be indicated in the source you've given and the "Date of publication" you've listed in the rationale is given as unknown. Did you get that information from another source? Moreover, it's not clear why this particular image was chosen since there appear to be others like this or this (used by the BBC Local Live: Merseyside and attributed to the Liverpool City Council) which could be used to serve the same encyclopedic purpose. Is there something contextually significant about this image that makes its non-free more appropriate these other images? -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:20, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, agreed with Masem. There's no indication that avenues toward getting a free image, such as requesting free license release from people who own images, have been exhausted. That being the case, even if this individual is deceased, it's entirely possible we could get free content. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 17:14, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Licensing has been changed to PD, but this would need to be confirmed by the copyright holder through OTRS per WP:CONSENT. January (talk) 15:39, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Lambda Kappa Phi Official Flag.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Third party design (Lambda Kappa Phi). Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:57, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Lambda Kappa Phi Logo.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Third party design ( Lambda Kappa Phi) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:57, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Chester Dane D. Cadimas.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:11, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused user photo. Kelly ^hi! 13:51, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Hirakawachi Naojiro Hikari .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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:11, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free singles cover being used in the article about the artist Whpq (talk) 13:53, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Tokyo single 2003.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:11, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free singles cover being used in the article about the artist Whpq (talk) 13:53, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Tokyo single 2008.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:11, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free singles cover being used in the article about the artist Whpq (talk) 13:54, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:TDH albumcover.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is an album cover being used in the infobox for an active musical group. Improper use as the article is not about the album, and a free image of the musical group would be possible as they are still active so this image is also replaceable based on its current usage. Whpq (talk) 14:01, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:TDH Follow Me.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Image is an album cover being used in an article about the group being used only to illustrate the EP. Whpq (talk) 14:02, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Zombies are zen (The Debutante Hour song - sample).ogg

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is a song sample being used in the infobox of the article about the group. There is no discussion about the song in the article, nor is there any explanation as to why this song sample is needed beyond "To demonstrate song in article" and thus lacks contextual significance. Whpq (talk) 14:04, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Blaconstn.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No source/authorship information for photo. There is a free image available at File:Blacon railway station 1823495 febb5f91.jpg. The non-free image fails WP:NFCC#8. Kelly ^hi! 14:09, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Left rail.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused, low resolution. Obsoleted by File:Train Station, Chester.JPG. Kelly ^hi! 14:22, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Right rail.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused, low resolution. Obsoleted by File:Train Station, Chester.JPG. Kelly ^hi! 14:22, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:St Werburgs.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused, low resolution. Clearer photos in Commons:Category:Chester Cathedral and Commons:Category:Chester Cathedral - exterior. Kelly ^hi! 14:31, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Chester Town Hall - Showing clock tower.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused, low resolution. Clearer photos in Commons:Category:Chester Town Hall. Kelly ^hi! 14:33, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Gros hotel.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 Nthep (talk) 15:54, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused, low resolution. Obsoleted by File:Grosvenor Hotel, Chester.JPG. Kelly ^hi! 14:51, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Clk1.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused, low resolution. Clearer images in Commons:Category:Eastgate Clock, Chester. Kelly ^hi! 16:08, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Clk2.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused, low resolution. Clearer images in Commons:Category:Eastgate Clock, Chester. Kelly ^hi! 16:10, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Cath.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused low res photo of Chester Cathedral. Kelly ^hi! 16:16, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Rudge.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: Keep - while PD status may be disputed, free-use is acceptable in Olga Rudge. Nthep (talk) 16:02, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Missing evidence of public domain claim. No information on initial publication. Kelly ^hi! 18:50, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, forget the public domain claim, fair use is a no brain anyways so there is no issue here to resolve. keep local Govindaharihari (talk) 20:22, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Aylesbury Prison.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 - lack of sourcing Nthep (talk) 16:23, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File missing source. Kelly ^hi! 19:57, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the subject, this either an official photo, or one taken by local press. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:42, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Chika ike's photograph.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, unused user photo. Kelly ^hi! 22:03, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Chika ike's pictures.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 22:05, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Children's Author Jonathan Emmett.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: Being handled by OTRS (non-admin closure) Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 00:05, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear whether uploader is copyright holder. Kelly ^hi! 22:07, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I can confirm that I own the image (which is of me) and am happy for it to be used on WikiMedia and Wikipedia. You can email me via my web site scribblestreet.co.uk if you want further confirmation. --Jonathan Emmett (talk) 15:07, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Normally copyright of photos belongs to the photographer unless you had an agreement at the time it was taken that the copyright would be transferred to you. Either way the copyright holder needs to confirm permission through OTRS per WP:CONSENT. January (talk) 16:24, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link. Have now filled out and sent a consent email --Jonathan Emmett (talk) 15:14, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:ChildSardasht.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence uploader is copyright holder. Kelly ^hi! 22:08, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Supen Ole Kasikasi.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned file. File description does not state who the subject is. It might have something to do with the now-deleted Aang Serian Drum article. Mz7 (talk) 23:46, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It was on that page in the infobox with no further information but their website. I guess it is an image "representing their work", so likely copyrighted marketing stuff, therefore delete. Agathoclea (talk) 12:05, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:Operationtusaidiane.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned file. The resolution is low enough to counsel doubt as to whether the uploader is truly the copyright holder – possibly taken from a now-defunct website. Mz7 (talk) 23:52, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.