The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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⚡ 09:05, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cardiff City squad 1920.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Kosack (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Bringing this up as the description actually asserts that no publication could be found despite what seems like a diligent search by uploader. This may mean that the image was unpublished (and either still is, if its online upload did not have the consent of the copyright holder, or remained unpublished until recently). In that case, US law would allow for copyright protection until 120 years after it was made. Since this is not a particularly formal shot, it may not even be reasonable to assume that it was made by a photographer and sold to a client, which would constitute publication under old US law. Felix QW (talk) 15:05, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:45, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Not actionable/status quo. Given that the logos were never uploaded to Commons and that the thread on Commons failed to yield any additional comments, there isn't anything for us to do here. -FASTILY 10:10, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:2024 Summer Olympics logo.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Conor M98 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

File:2024 Summer Paralympics logo.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Conor M98 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

I challenged the fact the Paris 2024 Olympics and Paralympics logos are fair use images. These logo (actually same logo but with Olympic and Paralympics symbol difference) is just consisted a simple circle and flame silhouette-like symbols. Therefore, these logos should not allowed to be placed locally at Wikipedia and should be included at Wikimedia Commons instead as a public domain images, assuming that the logo is below Threshold of originality. (Also included the 2024 Paralympics logo below this text for the same reason). 36.68.192.126 (talk) 00:59, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I just have just asked the question over at Commons, who currently host a png version under a bogus Creative Commons license. Felix QW (talk) 11:19, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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⚡ 01:01, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Enrique Pinti.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Sherlock4000 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

The photo is in the public domain in Argentina, but not in the US. — Ирука¹³ 05:13, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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⚡ 09:05, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Harvard shield wreath.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Frank.trampe (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

I am not sure what is going on with this file. In particular, I am unclear whether the vectorisation, which may hold its own copyright, is from Harvard University or from a user. In any case, a PNG version is held at Commons as a PD image with what seems to me to be sound reasoning, so this should either be deleted as replaceable, or transferred to Commons if the vectorisation is found to be freely licensed. Felix QW (talk) 12:02, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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⚡ 01:01, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Brown University coat of arms.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Connormah (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

As the coat of arms is a registered heraldic achievement, I am not sure whether it is appropriate to use a non-free rendering. In my opinion, it could validly be replaced by any rendering of its blazon, which is reproduced in full at our article. I have asked the Graphics lab for such a free rendering; otherwise, one could also use any rendering published by the university before 1978 without a copyright notice or before 1928. Felix QW (talk) 15:04, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Procedural close, not actionable; PD file is PD. Questions about its provenance should be directed to Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, thanks -FASTILY 10:10, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chew's Coach.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jml1786 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

There is a strange discrepanvy between the named author, who died in 1893, and the dating of the image itself to 1927. If the latter dating is correct, the public domain status of the image would have to rely on it having been published at the time of creation; if the image is in fact from the 19th century, it would be in the public domain regardless. Felix QW (talk) 15:56, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment it could be an unpublished photo that was published in 1927? -- 65.92.244.127 (talk) 08:40, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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⚡ 09:05, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cholokashvili COA.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Kober (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Although the ultimate source used by the artist is clearly old, there is no indication that the artist drawing this particular rendering of the coat of arms, Mikhail Wadbolski, is dead more than 70 years. In fact, a Google search reveals that he was active in the 1940s. If this mural had also been done in that time, it would presumably still be under copyright in Georgia and the US. The only chance I see to keep this as a public domain image would be if it turned out to have been painted (and published) before 1928 or if it were such a close copy of the medieval original as to have no copyright of its own. Felix QW (talk) 16:12, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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⚡ 09:05, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:CooperWaxModel.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Pworms (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

The image is labelled as being used "courtesy" of Medela AG, Baar, Switzerland, without any explicit free license. It is questionable whether a cast qualifies as a 2D object and therefore whether {{PD-Art}} applies; as we also exclude coins from that, doubt that it would be covered. The file is orphaned. Felix QW (talk) 18:52, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as orphaned with questionable licensing. HouseBlaster^talk 03:27, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: As determined below, this is not a freely licensed file. No prejudice to restoration if someone can create a valid fair use claim for the file. -FASTILY 10:15, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jews of Yemen, in Menakkhah; ca. 1931.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Davidbena (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Image looks to be first published in Germany in 1934. Even if we are assuming the author of this image was never known and c:Template:PD-anon-70-EU applies, URAA would have still protected this image. —Matr1x-101 _{(Ping me when replying)} {_{user page} ^{(@ commons)} - _talk} 19:41, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Carl Rathjens, a German citizen, visited Yemen in 1931, publishing his photo of Jews in Yemen in a publication that was printed in pre-war Germany, in 1934. The Nazi regime soon took over the government of Germany. The images printed by Rathjens were not protected by copyright laws in pre-war Germany.Davidbena (talk) 22:10, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Davidbena: can you show that the images were published in Yemen and not Germany? Also, they are protected by copyright in the USA now (due to c:COM:URAA) so we have to wait until 2030 if publication in Yemen cannot be proven. —Matr1x-101 _{(Ping me when replying)} {_{user page} ^{(@ commons)} - _talk} 16:13, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Matr1x-101:, to the best of my knowledge, all of Rathjens' publications were published either in Germany or in Israel. Unfortunately, I do not know of any publications made by him in Yemen. Does using an old image under "good faith" have any merit? I have seen this used in the Hebrew Wikipedia.Davidbena (talk) 20:30, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Davidbena: I'm not sure if there is some kind of policy (I don't think WP:AGF counts) but please correct me if you find one. But looking at Carl Rathjens § Publications (see "Landeskundliche Ergebnisse") I notice that this image was probably only published in Germany not Israel, so in most likeliness it's not public domain (at least until 96 years after publication) —Matr1x-101 _{(Ping me when replying)} {_{user page} ^{(@ commons)} - _talk} 20:42, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Matr1x-101: In the Hebrew Wikipedia, under the entry of Yosef Qafih (Hebrew: יוסף קאפח‎), which you can access here, you'll see a photo of the man. If you click onto the image, and later click onto the blue window for More Details, it reads there in Hebrew (translated here by me): "This file is copyrighted. However, the uploader of the file believes that its use on Wikipedia constitutes fair use. This file can be used in the Yosef Qafih entry only" (End Quote). Is there any way that we can invoke "Fair Use" here, in our image made in 1931 and published in 1934? As I see it, there are "rules," and there are "exceptions to the rule," especially when there may also be an expedient reason for keeping a good image, showing Jewish life in Yemen in the 1930s.Davidbena (talk) 21:47, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Davidbena: for fair use to occur, all of WP:NFCC need to be met, and this file isn't even being used in an article. —Matr1x-101 _{(Ping me when replying)} {_{user page} ^{(@ commons)} - _talk} 17:02, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Matr1x-101:, would it help to have the image inserted in an article? What other criteria are there for capitalizing on "Fair Use" of an image where there have not yet passed 96 years after its publication?Davidbena (talk) 21:54, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Davidbena: well you'd have to a) use the image in an article, and b) fully meet WP:NFCC. Most importantly, make sure you are not using the image WP:DECORATIVEly —Matr1x-101 _{(Ping me when replying)} {_{user page} ^{(@ commons)} - _talk} 16:26, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Matr1x-101:, for what it's worth, I have uploaded the image in the article entitled Carl Rathjens.Davidbena (talk) 22:51, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.