Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2021 August 24

< August 23	August 25 >

August 24

File:Thomas Schoenberger.jpeg

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 ⚡ 15:08, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable claim of "own work" and no real EXIF data or source infromation provided which might verify the file's provenance or licensing. The uploader is also indefinitely blocked as sock which also doesn't help establish any credibility for the claim. A Google image search shows the file being used a couple of places other than Wikipedia, but it's not clear if they predate the uploading of the file to Wikipedia. The file can be seen here as of April 2015, which is after the file was uploaded, but there's no indication of a license. Will notify the uploader as required, but it seems unlikely they will respond to this discussion or any requests for WP:CONSENT. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:34, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The fact that the image appears on the subject's web site means claim of own work by the uploader needs verification. Note that the URL of the image includes "/2013/01/" in the path. This is typical of blog setups for content upload by date and would indicate this image was uploaded to the subject's web site prior to the upload to Wikipedia. -- Whpq (talk) 13:08, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 08:18, 28 August 2021 (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:Gojira - Ocean Planet.ogg

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 2021 September 6. MBisanz ^talk 18:58, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gojira - Ocean Planet.ogg (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.

"Ss on black-01" series of images

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: Duplicates deleted. No comment on WP:NFCC compliance (concerns about this should be raised in a separate FfD). -FASTILY 23:21, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If using the same image in four articles, don't upload four different copies of the same image. Also, see WP:NFC#UUI §14. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:33, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: A pointed out by Stefan2, it's really not appropriate to essentially upload the same logo four time just to use in four different articles. Whether this was done based upon a misunderstanding (i.e. the belief that a non-free image can only be used in one article) is unclear, but it's still inappropriate nonetheless and three of the four files listed above need to be deleted unless there's really something different about them in terms of copyrightable elements. For logos of reoccurring event like a sporting competition, it's generally OK to use the logo in the main article about the event itself and perhaps an article about the specific individual occurrence (i.e. season) when the logo was first used. If the logo is a former logo, then it's use in the main article about the event might no longer mean it's being used for primary identification purposes; this means that the logo could have difficultly per WP:NFC#cite_note-4 if there's no sourced critical commentary about the logo anywhere to be found in that particular article. In an article about an individual occurrence of the event however, the logo could possibly still be used for primary identification purposes at the top of the article. Since none of these are currently being used in BWF Super Series, the only thing to figure out is when is the first year the logo was used. If it was in 2014 BWF Super Series, then that's the only article in which this file's non-free use can be justified, and the other three uses should be removed/deleted. Regardless of which of the four is keep, the file should also probably be renamed to something less cryptic per WP:FNC#2.
There is, however, another possibility to consider. These files are all quite similar in design to both File:BWF Super Series.png and File:BWF Super Series Premier.png being used in "BWF Super Series" in terms of copyrightable elements. Text, simple shapes, color variations aren't really considered eligible for copyright protection in the US per c:COM:TOO United States; so, the only possible copyrightable element is the circle-like element on the left of each logo, which is something that seems to be too simple to be eligible for copyright protection in the US. Depending on the country of origin of the logos (the Badminton World Federation is based out Malaysia), however, it's possible this could still be protected in the country origin which means relicensing the files as {{PD-logo}} won't work if c:COM:TOO Malaysia is anything close to c:COM:TOO United Kingdom. The license {{PD-ineligible-USonly}}, on the other hand might be OK for local use on Wikipedia, which would mean that the file we keep would no longer need to be treated as non-free and could be used in all four season articles. If this is the consensus though, the licensing of the two primary logos in the "BWF Super Series" articles should also be converted to "PD-ineligble-USonly"; otherwise, converting the individual season logo is "PD-ineligble-USonly" would make no sense at all. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:22, 24 August 2021 (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:Shkoder Flag.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. MBisanz ^talk 18:59, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alleged flag of Shkodër. Claimed PD, own work without any additional sources/citations. Suspect original research, the colors of the flag differ from this flag (which actually has a verifiable source) FASTILY 10:37, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The author subsequently cited it [1]. I'm not sure why it was not uploaded to Commons, where the File:Flamuri i Bashkisë Shkodër.svg resides. Even if it's PD, it seems derived from File:Flamuri i Bashkisë Shkodër.svg (I don't see the color difference?) authored by User:Bes-ART so it would be at minimum cool to list it as a derivative work. Keep I suppose, since policy reasons for deletion seem to have been resolved. No such user (talk) 11:07, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The red backgrounds are different. File:Shkoder Flag.png has a hex value of #B7435A, and File:Flamuri i Bashkisë Shkodër.svg has a hex value of #B3452B. Trying to assume good faith, but I suspect we have a case of WP:SNEAKY on our hands. -FASTILY 00:29, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The guy has created several so called flags and uploaded as its own work. 99% of them are fictional and doesn't provide any source but rather they are just derivats of the coat of arms of the municipality. I don't see any problem for him to use them in its user page but the guy is putting them on all infoboxes removing the originals (when available). Bes-ARTTalk 17:54, 27 August 2021 (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.

Jim Henson files

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 -FASTILY 23:21, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Each of these images are claimed to be used for primary indentificaiton in the Jim Henson article. There are free images of Henson so they fail WP:NFCC#1. Their actual use in sections of the article. Obviously the article talks about Henson and the Muppets and Fraggle Rock, but the images themselves are not the subject of significant source commentary. Fails WP:NFCC#8. -- Whpq (talk) 14:05, 24 August 2021 (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:AmoebaRecordsMural.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 ⚡ 01:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No freedom of panorama for 2D artworks in the United States. I'm not sure that it qualifies for fair use as parent page already has plenty of free images. Ixfd64 (talk) 19:18, 24 August 2021 (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.

HSBC BWF World Tour logo

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: Duplicate deleted. No comment on WP:NFCC compliance (concerns about this should be raised in a separate FfD). -FASTILY 23:24, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Three issues:

See WP:NFC#UUI §14.
Don't upload multiple copies of the same image if you want to use the image on multiple pages.
I'm unsure if this meets the threshold of originality.

In addition to these two copies, there is also File:Logo-world tour.svg on Commons which has been nominated for speedy deletion by User:Jonteemil. --Stefan2 (talk) 19:47, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There were also File:Logo-wt (1).svg and File:Logo-wt (3).svg which were deleted as {{Db-redundantimage}}.

Delete File:Logo-wt (2).svg: Similar to what I posted above in #"Ss on black-01" series of images, two separate uploads of the same file aren't needed regardless of how the files are licensed; so, one of them needs to be deleted. If the consensus is that this logo is too complex to even be {{PD-ineligible-USonly}} per c:COM:TOO United States, then the non-free use can only really be justified in one of the two articles and that would seem to be 2019 BWF World Tour per item 14 of WP:NFC#UUI. If that's the case, then it's probably best to keep File:HSBC BWF World Tour Logo.svg and tweak the non-free use rationale as needed for use only in the 2019 article. Keeping this file means there's no need to rename File:Logo-wt (2).svg per WP:FNC#2. On the other land, if the consensus is that this logo is "PD-ineligible-USonly", then "File:Logo-wt (2).svg" should still be deleted since it'll still be redundant and the other file could then be added to the 2019 article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:57, 24 August 2021 (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:Adele & Co dustjacket 1942.pdf

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: Resolved, converted to non-free -FASTILY 23:24, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bogus United States copyright tag. The last requirement, about PD status in the source country, was not satisfied on 1 January 1996.

It is unknown whether it is currently in the public domain in the source country. Is the cover artist named somewhere? I assume that Dornford Yates only wrote the text and that someone else made the cover. Stefan2 (talk) 20:05, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Given the date, this is unlikely to be PD in its home country, the UK. But as a primary image illustrating the book, within the WP article for that book, it is I think permitted here under US fair use. I've amended the file accordingly - but please feel free to correct if necessary. MichaelMaggs (talk) 21:18, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A fair use cover image is fine in Adèle and Co. per WP:NFC#cite note-3, but note that the article currently uses File:Adele & Co dustjacket 1942.jpg instead. Same edition but different scan and better file format. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:49, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I didn't notice that. The pdf version can indeed be deleted then. MichaelMaggs (talk) 08:01, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: While Stefan2 is correct about a non-free book cover most likely being acceptable under WP:NFC#cite_note-3, two non-free covers are not needed to serve the same encyclopedic purpose per WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8. This means that either this file or File:Adèle and Co, Yates, US first edition 1931.png probably needs to be deleted since there’s currently nothing to justify the non-free use of the latter in Adèle and Co#Critical reception per WP:DECORATIVE and WP:NFC#CS. Since it generally seems to be that the cover of the first edition of a book is what used for primary identification purposes, then perhaps that what should be done here. Regardless there’s no real justification fir using both covers in that article. — Marchjuly (talk) 09:11, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- This is a British book, so I think that we would usually want the cover of the first British edition, but the files uploaded show the first American edition and a later British edition. I don't know which one we would prefer out of those two. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:00, 28 August 2021 (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:ARTIQ system overview.pdf

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 ⚡ 01:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The source link is dead. I can't find any evidence that this was made by NIST. If made by M-Labs, then {{PD-USGov}} does not apply. Stefan2 (talk) 20:09, 24 August 2021 (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:Canton Viaduct Masonic Memorial.pdf

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 ⚡ 01:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Does not appear to be own work as stated. Stefan2 (talk) 20:14, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, essentially orphaned (not used in the main space) with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 08:23, 28 August 2021 (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:Experiences and Observations in Applying Augmented Reality to Live Training.pdf

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 ⚡ 01:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

According to the copyright notice at the bottom, the copyright belongs to Peculiar Technologies, not to the author. See also WP:F10. Stefan2 (talk) 20:36, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 08:23, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am jonbarril. I uploaded the file for inclusion in Wikipedia. Peculiar Technologies was my company, owned by me as sole proprietor. As such, I provide whatever authorization is needed for the file to appear in Wikipedia and to be used consistent with Wikipedia permissions and guidelines. jonb (talk) 15:36, 24 May 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:FigNGC3348.pdf

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 ⚡ 01:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, no foreseeable use. Stefan2 (talk) 20:39, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 08:24, 28 August 2021 (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:Firaq Gorakhpuri's comment on Mohsin Zaidi's book.pdf

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 ⚡ 01:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Claimed to be Firaq Gorakhpuri's comment on Mohsin Zaidi's book, so made by Firaq Gorakhpuri, not by the uploader. Stefan2 (talk) 20:40, 24 August 2021 (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:Flowchart fatigue life.pdf

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 ⚡ 01:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, no foreseeable use. Stefan2 (talk) 20:41, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 08:25, 28 August 2021 (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:Hisne afida Yemen.pdf

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 ⚡ 01:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The source link is dead, but the text in the source field in the information template suggests CC-BY-NC-ND 3.0, not CC-BY 4.0. Stefan2 (talk) 20:47, 24 August 2021 (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:Hotel Astoria, Belgrade, 1938.pdf

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 ⚡ 01:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

1938 image so unlikely to be own work by the uploader. Stefan2 (talk) 20:48, 24 August 2021 (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:InfrastructureSystems.pdf

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 ⚡ 01:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, no foreseeable use. Stefan2 (talk) 20:53, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 08:26, 28 August 2021 (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:Letter from Walter Scott to PM McMahon 2 May 1969.pdf

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 ⚡ 01:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bogus PD reason. Stefan2 (talk) 20:59, 24 August 2021 (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:LifeCycleDiagram.pdf

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 ⚡ 01:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, no foreseeable use. Stefan2 (talk) 20:59, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 08:26, 28 August 2021 (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:Lonar Wildlife Sanctuary, Maharashtra.pdf

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 ⚡ 01:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious own work. Stefan2 (talk) 21:02, 24 August 2021 (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:Mioce-Bijelo Polje Population by etnicity.pdf

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 ⚡ 01:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, no foreseeable use. Stefan2 (talk) 21:12, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 08:26, 28 August 2021 (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:Moral exclusion and group norms in three levels of society.pdf

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 ⚡ 01:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, no foreseeable use. Stefan2 (talk) 21:12, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 08:26, 28 August 2021 (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:Polygamy Wiki Entry.pdf

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 ⚡ 01:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to have been written by MIFUMI, a Uganda Women's Rights NGO, not by the uploader. Stefan2 (talk) 21:18, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 08:27, 28 August 2021 (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:Survey Results for Anthony McDonnell (AusMonarch).pdf

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 ⚡ 01:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to have been created by YouGov, not by the uploader. Stefan2 (talk) 21:30, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 08:27, 28 August 2021 (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:Vienna to Budapest Supermarathon Archives 1990-1998.pdf

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 ⚡ 01:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious own work. Stefan2 (talk) 21:35, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 08:27, 28 August 2021 (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:Clair Roddewig, 14th Attorney General of South Dakota.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 ⚡ 01:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It does not appear this is an original work of the uploader. They seem to have simply photographed a framed official portrait. SecretName101 (talk) 21:38, 24 August 2021 (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:Leo A. Temmey, 15th Attorney General of South Dakota.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 ⚡ 01:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It does not appear this is an original work of the uploader. They seem to have simply photographed a framed official portrait. SecretName101 (talk) 21:42, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or convert to non-free since this is either a case in which the photo is c:COM:2D copying or WP:Derivative work, which means that the provenance of original work shown in the photo needs to be taken into consideration. The originally uploaded photo shows the photo in a frame and name plaque being displayed on some way. So, unless the uploader is also claiming to be the copyright holder of that photo, the claim of "own work" only applies to the photo taken of the photo. Leo A. Temmey was elected the Attorney General of South Dakota in 1938 and 1940, which is around when this photo was most likely taken. That's certainly not old enough in terms of age to be considered within the public domain in the United States per c:COM:HIRTLE; moreover, South Dakota doesn't appear to be a state that releases works created by its employees as part of their official duties into the public domain per WP:PD#US government works. So, unless it can clearly be shown that original photo of Temmey is no longer protected by copyright or has been released under a free license by its copyright holder, this needs to be treated as non-free content. Temmey is dead and a non-free image of him could possibly be used under the license {{Non-free biog pic}} per item 10 of WP:NFCI, but that justification ({{Non-free use rationale biog}}) wouldn't apply to Attorney General of South Dakota#List of attorneys general per WP:NFLISTS, item 6 of WP:NFC#UUI, etc. and the file would need to be removed from that article. If converted to non-free, the file should probably have to licenses: a no-free one for the original photo and the free one for the photo of the photo. There would also need to be a non-free use rationale added for the file's use in the article about Temmey in addition to description already provided by the uploader. Of course, converting this non-free would only work if there are no WP:FREER issues because any 100% free equivalent photo or Temmey that can either be found or created would make using a non-free, even a 50% non-free image like this, unacceptable. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:45, 24 August 2021 (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:Garuda-in-flight-entertainment-02.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 ⚡ 01:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused derivative work of copyrighted design. Ixfd64 (talk) 22:36, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 08:28, 28 August 2021 (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.