Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2022 April 20

< April 19	April 21 >

April 20

File:National T20 Cup 2021 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: Marking this as resolved/inactionable, as the file has been removed from 2021–22 National T20 Cup. If there are concerns with the remaining use in National T20 Cup, then please open a new FfD. -FASTILY 05:29, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:UUI point 14, as it's a general logo for the National T20 Cup, which shouldn't be used in an article for a specific season Joseph2302 (talk) 14:07, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per nom. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 17:44, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. This is no longer being used in 2021–22 National T20 Cup as it was when originally nominated. It is now in the infobox for National T20 Cup. Seems to be okay now? ✗plicit 23:57, 27 April 2022 (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:Dot af.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 ⚡ 01:02, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This file was a revision of File:Dotaf.png. As this file was overwritten by a completely different file, it was split into a seperate file. At first glance, to me it appeared pixelated enough that it is not {{PD-textlogo}}, and thus should be deleted per WP:F5. However, after performing the HISTSPLIT, Graeme Bartlett suggested that this image might qualify for {{PD-textlogo}}, and now I am undecided if the image is nonfree or not. Nominating this here to seek consensus as to if it should be deleted. It is orphaned, so if nonfree, it needs to be deleted. House Blaster^talk 16:15, 20 April 2022 (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:Rokr z6.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 ⚡ 01:02, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious own work claim as a higher resolution version could be found elsewhere prior to the upload to Wikipedia. [1] Image is not used on any pages. Ixfd64 (talk) 17:46, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 01:59, 21 April 2022 (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.