Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2018 August 18

< August 17	August 19 >

August 18

File:Washington Redskins uniforms.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: relisted on 2018 August 26. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:17, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Washington Redskins uniforms.png (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:Nutricate receipt 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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:07, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unused image (possiby used in a now-deleted article). File is not a candidate to be copied to Commons. Senator2029 “Talk” 19:37, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Article was deleted via Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Zakmonix/Nutricate Corporation. DMacks (talk) 17:53, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 18:12, 24 August 2018 (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:Nutricate 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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:07, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unused image (possiby used in a now-deleted article). File is not a candidate to be copied to Commons. Senator2029 “Talk” 19:37, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Article was deleted via Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Zakmonix/Nutricate Corporation. DMacks (talk) 17:53, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 18:12, 24 August 2018 (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:Nutricate logo educate.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 ⚡ 10:07, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unused image (possiby used in a now-deleted article). File is not a candidate to be copied to Commons. Senator2029 “Talk” 19:38, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Article was deleted via Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Zakmonix/Nutricate Corporation. DMacks (talk) 17:53, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 18:12, 24 August 2018 (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:SignatureOfWilliamDukeOfCambridge.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: keep. As noted, things eligible for copyright protection in one country are not by default eligible for copyright protection in another, and this seems to be one of the rare cases where this applies. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:18, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

UK signatures are considered as copyrighted as per the reasons given in commons and as such should not be reproduced here either I believe. Dom from Paris (talk) 20:19, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - @Domdeparis: English Wikipedia only requires that images be public domain in the United States of America, not in their home country. Signatures are not copyrightable in the United States regardless of their status in their home country. --B (talk) 15:16, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that. I thought the 2 projects had similar rules. So when a copyrighted work from another country is copied to an American server the work then loses its original copyrighted status? Seems sort of unfair almost like stealing in one country and then smuggling it through customs for it to become the property of everyone in your home country. A bit like the Elgin Marbles in a way. Anyway it's a moot point but at least I learnt something. Thanks. Dom from Paris (talk) 15:39, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Domdeparis: It's not that it loses its original copyright status. It's that it never had that status to begin with in the United States. There's no analogy that works with stealing physical property because it's not physical property - it's intellectual property. Another possible analogy might be if you went to somewhere that didn't have safe clean drinking water and you spent $500 to buy a bottle of pure water. You then fly back to the US and the customs agent asks you if you have anything to declare over $100. Though your bottle of clean water may have been worth $500 overseas, it's not worth anything here. You didn't steal it - it just lost its significance by virtue of crossing the border. As an aside, there are plenty of files on Commons that are copyrighted somewhere in the world - Commons only requires them to be PD in the US and in their country of origin. So say, for example, that something first published in the US is not copyrighted in the US because it lacked a copyright notice and was published pre-1978. Commons will happily host that image (as will the English Wikipedia). But if you were to print that article out and take it to somewhere that doesn't follow the rule of the shorter term, say, Switzerland, then it might be copyrighted there, even though it's public domain most places in the world. --B (talk) 17:42, 20 August 2018 (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:Elvis with parents 1958.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 ⚡ 10:07, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Listed as an AP photo at the source, on the file page and at http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/AP-KU-USA-ELVIS-PRESLEY-PARENTS/0db0f77fb0e0da11af9f0014c2589dfb/1/0. DrKay (talk) 20:23, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - if the AP were to have actually published the photo without a copyright notice, it would be public domain. But a third party publishing the photo isn't the same thing. There was a case with Star Trek where the first season was shown in syndication without a copyright notice and a court ruled that this didn't cause Paramount to lose their copyright. (Paramount Pictures v. Rubinowitz) --B (talk) 23:09, 20 August 2018 (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:3D Ionospheric Ray Example.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; deleted by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:07, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate to File:3D Ionospheric Ray Example.png Magog the Ogre (t • c) 21:03, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rationale for deletion: local file must satisfy

WP:CSD#F8, which requires that "the Commons version is in the same file format

and is of the same or higher quality/resolution."

Following the link to

WP:IUP#Format

, we are informed that "most of the maps on the CIA World Factbook website were coded as JPEG, but are now coded as GIF. To update these photos, download the GIF picture from the CIA Factbook, resave it in PNG format, and upload it to Wikipedia.

So, we have here a recommendation to convert GIF files to PNG (both lossless formats). In this case specifically, we already have the PNG version on Commons with same quality, so there's no need to also upload a GIF of the same image. —capmo (talk) 21:41, 18 August 2018 (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.