Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2019 February 1

< January 31	February 2 >

February 1

File:562nd Parachute Squadron Royal Corps of Transport (Volunteers) (insignia).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) 01:38, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

per c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:562nd Parachute Squadron Royal Corps of Transport (Volunteers) (insignia).jpg Magog the Ogre (t • c) 04:30, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value (and terrible quality). Salavat (talk) 23:48, 4 February 2019 (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:Ubercon vlad rgb 250.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) 01:38, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

no source, unlikely to be own work. Jon Kolbert (talk) 17:43, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 23:48, 4 February 2019 (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:UCTV News.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) 01:38, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

unlikely to be own work, copyright belongs to UCTV (University of Connecticut). Proper statement of permission required. Jon Kolbert (talk) 17:44, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 23:49, 4 February 2019 (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:UC Sports.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) 01:38, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

unlikely to be own work, copyright belongs to UCTV (University of Connecticut). Proper statement of permission required. Jon Kolbert (talk) 17:44, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 23:48, 4 February 2019 (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:Uclaradio.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) 01:39, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

unlikely to be own work, copyright belongs to UCLA Radio. Proper statement of permission required. Jon Kolbert (talk) 17:46, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 23:49, 4 February 2019 (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:OrdinaryMadness.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. No evidence of permission — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:40, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Similar file is unfree, proper statement of permission needs to be sent to WP:OTRS. Jon Kolbert (talk) 19:10, 1 February 2019 (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.

Redundant non-free uploads by RainbowSilver2ndBackup

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) 01:45, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Similar to #File:Olympic Council of Asia Flag.svg above, all of these file appear to have been first uploaded to Commons and were subsequently deleted. They then were re-uploaded to locally to Wikipedia even their either might not need to be licensed as non-free or the way they are being used doesn't comply with WP:NFCCP. The uploader is apparently concerned that the files will be deleted per WP:F5 if they aren't used in any articles, and added non-free rationales for their respective uses; however, just adding a rationale is not a sufficient reason to keep these files as explained WP:JUSTONE, and the way they are currently being used fails WP:NFCC#1, WP:NFCC#3, WP:NFCC#8 (WP:NFC#cite_note-4) and items 6, 14, and 17 of WP:NFC#UUI.

I suggest delete for the following files since there's no way in my opinion to justify there non-free use.

"File:IAAF flag.svg" is redundant to File:International Association of Athletics Federations logo.svg so there's really no need to have two files which are pretty much identical used in the parent article International Association of Athletics Federations; moreover, there's no real justification for using the parent organization's logo in articles such as IAAF World Indoor Championships and IAAF World Race Walking Team Championships, and event specific logos should be used instead.
"File:IIHF flag.svg" is basically redundant to File:IIHF logo.svg and there's not reason for two of the same file or any justification for the logo's use in IIHF European Cup.
"File:FEI flag.svg" is redundant to File:International Federation for Equestrian Sports.svg and it's non-free use also has the same problems mentioned above.
"File:FIH flag.svg" is basically the same as File:International Hockey Federation Logo.svg, only with the addition of a colored backgroud. It's also not needed for the reasons given above.
"File:IFSC flag.svg" is redundant to File:International Federation of Sport Climbing Logo.svg and is also not needed per the above.

The remaining files might possibly be ok to keep since their licensing might be able to be converted to WP:PD or they might be acceptable as a replacement for an exisiting non-free file; otherwise, they need should also be deleted.

"File:M fisa logo.svg" is an svg version of the non-free File:M fisa logo.png which might be OK if this is an official svg version put out the the original copyright holder, but might not be acceptable per WP:FREER if it's a user created vector of the png logo.
"File:BWF flag.svg" is redundant to File:2012 BWF logo.svg so there's no need for it to be kept per WP:FREER unless it can be converted to PD.
"File:UCI flag.svg" seems similar enough to File:Union cycliste internac logo.png that it might also be PD; otherwise, it might not be needed as non-free per WP:FREER.
"File:ISSF flag.svg" is redundant to File:ISSF logo.svg so if the latter is acceptable as PD, then a non-free version is not needed per WP:FREER.

I'm not completely sure why some of the files in the second group were deleted from Commons since a few of them appear to be identical of quite similar to exisiting Commons files. However, if there are concerns about converting them to {{PD-logo}}, then maybe {{PD-ineligible-USonly}} would be an acceptable alternative. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:42, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TheSandDoctor ^Talk 22:38, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all. It's unlikely that these individual tournaments would exclusively use the flags with the logos on them but not the logos themselves. In such a case this should be explained in the rationale. As for File:M fisa logo.svg, delete per Marchjuly (I didn't find this svg on their site by Google), and restore File:M fisa logo.png. Some of these might be {{PD-logo}} or {{PD-ineligible-USonly}}. I'm hesitant to say which, but if anyone wants it on them they can tag those images. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 12:20, 2 February 2019 (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:Vcmerrifield-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: relisted on 2019 February 10. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:49, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vcmerrifield-photo.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:Francisco Oller.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) 01:46, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

~~unused~~, missing source and attribution details (no way to verify that the image is PD as claimed) FASTILY 02:42, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: File is currently in use on the articles Francisco Oller, List of Latin American artists, List of Puerto Ricans and Spanish settlement of Puerto Rico. Salavat (talk) 13:58, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:59, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 10:52, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TheSandDoctor ^Talk 22:38, 1 February 2019 (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:EWHomburg.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) 01:47, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:EWHomburg.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

after 10 years someone should take care about Weiss's pictures, if there is any chance for public domain, for instance by an OTRS-ticket from the owners or the like, and thereby for Commons. Otherwise all his pictures should be removed until 2036, imho Goesseln (talk) 21:12, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TheSandDoctor ^Talk 22:38, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this and the rest. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 12:04, 2 February 2019 (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.