Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2023 June 5

June 5

File:Philip Connard NPG 4702.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: Status quo, keep as-is. As stated below, it's unclear when this was actually published. -FASTILY 00:38, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While it's easy to understand why the uploader chose to upload this as non-free given the EXIF data showing a copyright claim being made by the

PD-Art}} for Wikipedia's purposes per c:COM:PD-Art. It seems quite clear from National Portrait Gallery and Wikimedia Foundation copyright dispute that the WMF doesn't acknowledge that copyright claims of the NPG with respect to digitalizations of PD paintings. So, unless there's something quite different about this particular painting here, there seems to be no reason for this too not to be PD and OK for Commons, especially given the fact that c:Category:Images from the National Portrait Gallery, London contains 5,308 other NPG sourced paintings or works of art. Suggest Convert to PD-Art and move to Commons. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:12, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Comment: Philip Connard died in 1958 according to our article, so his paintings don't go into public domain in the UK until 2029. c:COM:PD-Art only applies to artworks in the public domain in both the US and country of origin, so we have a few years yet before Connard's works are acceptable. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 13:34, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I forgot the UK follows a 70
  p.m.a rule. In that case, it would still be worth discussing whether this can be treated as {{PD-US-expired-abroad}} for local use only on English Wikipedia instead of as non-free. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:20, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Keep as non-free because we can't show it's PD in either the US or the UK. Philip Connard's UK copyright expires in 2029. The US copyright lasts 95 years (assuming it was published when it was made). The gallery said it was painted in the 1910s or 1920s, and if it was made in 1929, copyright expires in 2025. The Quirky Kitty (talk) 21:49, 7 June 2023 (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:Peggy Moffitt in Rudi Gernreich monokini swimsuit 1964.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: Remove from all except Monokini -FASTILY 00:38, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free image being used in

WP:NFC#UUI. So, it seems that the file's non-free use in the main infobox is in appropriate per the NFCC. Moving the file to Peggy Moffitt#Monokini also has NFCC#1 and NFCC#8 issues. There's a hatnote at the top of that section that leads to "Monokini" and most of the content in the Moffitt article seems to be pretty much the same as in Monokini#Origins so it's hard to see how this non-free use is justified.

The use in the Gernreich article is similar to the use in the Moffit article in that most of the content is the same as what's in the Monokini article and there's also a hatnote to that article. So, it's hard to see how this use too meets NFCC#1 and NFCC#8.

Suggest Keep for the monokini article, but Remove for the other two articles. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:43, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Comment - Wouldn't the existence of File:Rudi Gernreich 1964 wool monokini, exhibited at 'The Vulgar' at Modemuseum Hasselt 2018 (crop).jpg and File:Rudi Gernreich c.1964 monokini, exhibited at 'The Vulgar' at Modemuseum Hasselt 2018.jpg negate the fair-use of this photo aside from an article specifically about the photo itself? (Asking because I really don't know.) BilCat (talk) 03:57, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- It looks to me that there's enough discussion in monokini specifically of Moffitt and the photographs of her modelling it to justify one of those photographs in the article – though the association may be clearer if that photo were used to illustrate Monokini#Origins (in which case one of the exhibition photos you link could replace it in the infobox) Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 13:26, 5 June 2023 (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:Colégio Militar School Logo.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) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In light of commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Colégio Militar School Logo.jpg it seems like this logo would be too old to be copyrighted, making the low quality local copy unnecessary. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:31, 5 June 2023 (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:S-LCD 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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unused logo. Cloudbound (talk) 12:00, 5 June 2023 (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:RTÉ Gold.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, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unused logo. Cloudbound (talk) 13:01, 5 June 2023 (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:RTÉ Radio 1 Extra.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, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unused logo. Cloudbound (talk) 14:15, 5 June 2023 (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:Burton Menswear 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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unused logo. Cloudbound (talk) 14:27, 5 June 2023 (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:Central England Co-operative.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, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unused logo. Cloudbound (talk) 14:31, 5 June 2023 (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:London & Partners 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 as

F8 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Unused logo. Cloudbound (talk) 14:33, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I generally support keeping unused logos without copyright problems. The Quirky Kitty (talk) 08:14, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is

not a file storage area of unused images. Since this image is not PD in the UK, it cannot be transferred to Commons. However, such images are usually deleted with no prejudice to restoration if someone identifies a valid, policy-compliant use for the image -FASTILY 03:05, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Perhaps we have different view of what should be keept, but some of these could be old logos that could be re-added to the page. The Quirky Kitty (talk) 04:58, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, you misunderstand me; I'm neither advocating to keep nor delete this image, and frankly I could care less about the outcome of this individual FfD. In reality, I'm merely pointing out the fact that your statements are not aligned with accepted policy. Like I said, if you find a use for the image, then great, you already know how this works, good luck, have fun. However, adding images for the sake of adding images is frowned upon by the community, so I trust you'll be following the MOS and applying plenty of common sense. -FASTILY 05:40, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I actually think we can move this one to Commons; as noted by commons:Commons:Threshold of originality#United Kingdom even in the UK you need more than a string of letters to establish copyrightability, and this one is just a red typeface. It's not equivalent to File:EDGE magazine (logo).svg which a British court argued can be copyrighted due to subtle modifications of the typeface. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 05:00, 12 June 2023 (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:Transformers - Robots in Disguise (2015 TV series) logo.svg

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: Remove from List of Transformers: Robots in Disguise (2015 TV series) episodes -FASTILY 00:38, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Though this file is okay per

WP:BOLD. Steel1943 (talk) 20:19, 5 June 2023 (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.