Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 October 29

< October 28	October 30 >

October 29

File:DeanMalenkoCropped.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 ⚡ 02:01, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned plus there’s a near duplicate on Commons, File:Dean Malenko (cropped).jpg which is in the original JPEG format. Ytoyoda (talk) 03:48, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, redundant to Commons file. Salavat (talk) 06:55, 31 October 2020 (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:SMMakatiNew.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 ⚡ 02:01, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Potentially copyright violation: found this inage at http://www.rochellerivera.com/2014/12/so-much-beauty-at-new-sm-beauty-makati.html?m=1 (dated December 12, 2014, versus the upload date here which is December 28, 2015 Philippine Standard Time) JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 05:03, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete judging by all the copyvio warnings on the talk page of the uploader, the claim of own work is very dubious indeed. -- Whpq (talk) 01:16, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 06:56, 31 October 2020 (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:777-300ERSF.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: Textbook WP:NFCC#8 (and probable WP:NFCC#1) violation. No prejudice to restoration if the article is significantly expanded to discuss this particular image in depth. -FASTILY 00:09, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This non-free image is for a specific freight conversion configuration of the the Boing 777 which has not yet ben built and released. The image itself is not the subject of significant sourced commentary. There are plenty of free images of other version of the 777, and the provided text description of changes over the passenger models is sufficient to understand what this aircraft configuration would look like. Fails WP:NFCC#8 and WP:NFCC#1. Whpq (talk) 14:47, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What's different from other Boeing 777-300ERs is the added cargo door and its position, as noted in the image caption and the facing text, as well as in the references. I added the ref in the picture caption.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 17:01, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that brief information is sufficient to meet WP:NFCC#8. -- Whpq (talk) 01:20, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A third opinion would be welcome.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 06:56, 30 October 2020 (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:KirkTaylorBlueShirt.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 ⚡ 02:01, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader claims own work and free license, but also states in uploading comment that the images are by the subject himself, Kirk Taylor. The two files listed below are also credited to Taylor, but uploaded as own work. Other files depicting Taylor have already been deleted, as I could find evidence online of them being clear violations of copyright. Vycl1994 (talk) 16:17, 29 October 2020 (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.