Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2025 February 2

February 2

File:Tom Brown's School Days 1st edition cover.png

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 one's confident in the copyright status of this image, so in the spirit of Wikipedia:Precautionary principle that means we delete. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:10, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

File:Tom Brown's School Days 1st edition cover.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by EamonnPKeane (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Photograph, rather than scan. There is no indication that the photograph of the book was released under a free license; a mechanical scan would not attract its own copyright, but this might.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 19:31, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

• Very Weak Keep and/or Move to Commons as PD I'm on the fence on this one. This is a relatively rare book, but that's about as close to a faithful scan of a 2D, PD image (cover and spine) as possible. Near as I can tell, this is effectively a mechanical scan. I'd say that this qualifies, but I'm willing to be swayed by caselaw/precedent. Buffs (talk) 15:51, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

• Unsure. On the one hand, we have c:COM:ART#Photograph of an old coin found on the Internet, which has some 3D effects and isn't OK. There is also c:Template:Non-free frame, where people are requested to remove a non-free part of the photo. On the other hand, we have c:COM:ART#Photograph of an old stained glass window or tapestry found on the Internet or in a book, where minimal 3D parts may be accepted. As the 3D part is a bit visible and light is somewhat reflected, it's maybe OK, maybe not OK. --Stefan2 (talk) 16:14, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any solid opinions on the copyright status?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:43, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

• In addition to the above, there is another problem: the relative position of the cover and spine. When they are fused, it is {{PD-Art}}. Now it is really unsure. — Ирука¹³ 08:11, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.