Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2019 August 6

< August 5	August 7 >

August 6

File:Patrick Crusius Video Surveillance Shooting.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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:21, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Clear copyvio taken from https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/08/04/patrick-crusius-el-paso-shooting-suspect-fuels-fears-increasing/ WWGB (talk) 05:02, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This file's copyright is owned by Walmart and not the telegraph who posted it from police information made public. It's not a copyvio if it qualifies under fair use. The file has been reviewed and the image resized to comply with fair use rationale. I very thoroughly researched the photo before uploading it, and another editor scaled the image down. As it stands, it's clearly allowed under fair use doctrine. Please AGF. I clearly identified the source of the photo, along with the fact that it is a still of live video from the Walmart Surveillance System Video provided to the police. Materials provided to the police and made part of a public police investigation are also clearly allowed under fair use and in fact may be in the public domain. If Walmart objects to the use of an image they themselves released into the public domain, they can open a ticket and complain about it, and at that time we should review it's usage. Octoberwoodland (talk) 05:24, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
File appears to comply with fair use, per Octoberwoodland. (I wouldn't speculate that it's in the public domain though.) Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks ♥) 15:31, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This is an image of an event used in an article about that event. Contextual significance: it's an image of the perpetrator in the commission of the crime that is the subject of the article. Free equivalent available? Not without a time machine. Previous publication? Everywhere. Minimal usage? Small resolution, used once. This seems like an WP:NFC home run. – Levivich 00:27, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above, legit fair use. EllenCT (talk) 05:02, 17 August 2019 (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:Buch or something like that.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. already deleted by Fastily (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 06:09, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unused personal image, appears to pertain to some kind of grudge from a couple years ago (see [1]). We're not in the business of hosting unused personal images forever. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:30, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 23:42, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It's an encyclopedia not a web host. Masum Reza^📞 14:25, 12 August 2019 (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:Spirit Airlines Headquarters Exterior.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. already deleted by Fastily (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 06:09, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious breach of NFCC is obvious. It's a generic office block and clearly doesn't significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and there's nothing to indicate that it doesn't still exist so there's no reason to suppose there would be no way to create a free equivalent. ‑ Iridescent 20:27, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I uploaded this as a result of a requested image request on the talk page. Here is the Diff AmericanAir88^(talk) 20:29, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is a copyrighted image from https://airwaysmag.com/airlines/spirit-airlines-frills-free-corporate-hq-occ/. From the rationales given on the file description page (e.g. "depiction of a non-free 3D artwork") it appears that the uploader might think any low-resolution 2D depiction of a 3D artwork is OK to use on Wikipedia. This isn't the case. In general, it's OK to use a 2D depiction of 3D art if the 2D depiction is freely licensed, which obviously is not the case here. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 20:42, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Masum Reza^📞 14:27, 12 August 2019 (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.