Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2013 February 27

< February 26	February 28 >

February 27

File:SecretTakeYouHome.jpg

Violation of WP:NFCC#3a. Stefan2 (talk) 15:07, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Laut Gedacht (Basic Version).jpg

File:Laut Gedacht (Standard Version).jpg

File:Laut Gedacht (Premium Edition).jpg

WP:NFCC 3a. There are such trivial differences that it could not be considered "minimal use". I suggest deletion of these 3 images, and only File:Silbermond-laut gedacht.jpg should remain in the article (Laut Gedacht). James086^Talk 15:15, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Whitechapel-TheSomaticDefilementreissue.jpg

Violation of WP:NFCC#3a. Stefan2 (talk) 15:28, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Minimal usage? It is the alternate art for an album. Almost every album article has this. The Flood (Of Mice & Men album) and Numbers (Woe, Is Me album) being two prime examples. And those have never got this warning. The art shows the different cover for the upcoming re-release of the album and does not reflect upon previous versions and therefore, does not fall under WP:NFCC#3a. XyphynX9 (talk) 16:51, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"A file with a valid non-free-use rationale for some (but not all) articles it is used in will not be deleted. Instead, the file should be removed from the articles for which it lacks a non-free-use rationale, or a suitable rationale added." Taken straight from the enforcement section below. XyphynX9 (talk) 16:56, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- For the other two articles you mentioned, see WP:OTHERTHINGSEXIST. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:08, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ferns, by Cleo Hartwig. Smithsonian American Art Museum.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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:01, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Photo of a seemingly random artwork by an American artist, used for showing an example of the artist's works. Searching for the artist's name at www.copyright.gov, I can't find any copyright renewal registrations. This should mean that all works first published between 1951 and 1963 are in the public domain, so the image is replaceable by a photo of a different work. Works first published before 1951 might be protected by copyright. This requires searching for paper renewals, which is a bit more difficult. Works published after 1963 might also be published if they contain a visible copyright notice.

Additionally, there is no evidence of permission from the photographer. Photos of artworks have two copyrights: the photographer's copyright and the artist's copyright. Stefan2 (talk) 15:36, 27 February 2013 (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:TheFloodReIssue.jpg

Violation of WP:NFCC#3a. Stefan2 (talk) 21:07, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]