Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2024 March 9

March 9

File:Anwar Shah Kashmiri.png

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 ⚡ 12:05, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded under-fair use. Unknown person portrayed falsely as Anwar Shah Kashmiri. The family members of Kashmiri consider all of these images false, and his son Anzar Shah Kashmiri is reported to have stated same. In my own account, I have met Ubaid Anwar Shah, grandson of Azhar Shah Qaiser, who was the elder son of Kashmiri - and Ubaid stressed on the unavailibility of any reliable image of Kashmiri. Very recently, he responded to a viral tweet, "This is a fake photo. No pic of Allama Kashmiri exists in this world." Why do we have use this hoax here? ─ Aafī (talk) 07:54, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per nom, this image fails WP:NFCC#4 (image has not previously been published by any reliable sources that identify the individual pictured as Kashmiri), WP:NFCC#5 (images' purpose is not encyclopedic as it is being used to represent a false claim), WP:NFCC#8 (per the previous item, the image is clearly not contextually significant, as it is irrelevant to the subject of the article), & WP:NFCC#10 (specifically subsections a & b, as the copyright holder and WP:NFCC#1 sections of the fair-use rationale were left blank, as well as the WP:NFCC#2 section was filled in with an invalid answer. -- Fhsig13 (talk) 08:37, 9 March 2024 (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.

File:Democratic Republican Party logo.png

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: No action. The Commons version is presumably a copyvio -Fastily 22:55, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unused file Sangjinhwa (talk) 19:29, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete: This image meets criterion WP:F5 for WP:SPEEDY, as it is orphaned. This image also fails WP:NFCC#7 for obvious reasons, and WP:NFCC#10 (specifically subsections a & b, as the copyright owner and WP:NFCC#2 sections of the fair-use rationale were left blank, as well as the aforementioned WP:NFCC#7 section was filled out inaccurately, per my first two points. -- Fhsig13 (talk) 21:52, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - at least for now. The reason this is not used is because the nominator uploaded this to Commons claiming this is too simple for copyright. The bull is not a simple shape. I've nominated for deletion at Commons. -- Whpq (talk) 13:53, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, @Whpq, for providing this information. Since the image in question will most likely see future non-free use, I concur that it should be kept for the time being, and as such have struck my original vote. -- Fhsig13 (talk)

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.

File:'Minidoka by Wendy Maruyama.jpg

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: keep. Nomination withdrawn with no delete !votes present. Whpq (talk) 03:14, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this image meets criterion WP:F9 for WP:SPEEDY, despite the uploader's claim of "own work", as there is no Freedom of Panorama for 3D artworks/sculptures in the US, per c:COM:FOP US. Therefore, in order for the uploader to use their photograph on Wikipedia, they would require permission from the pieces' copyright holder. That said, there have been a couple of similar cases discussed here in the past few days, so I thought it best to seek consensus on this one as well. -- Fhsig13 (talk) 01:31, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not claiming it's my work. Wendy Maruyama is mentioned four times as the artist who created the piece. I took the photograph, hence why under "source", my name is found. What other type of wording do you suggest? APK hi :-) (talk) 19:24, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not the wording that is the issue. The issue is that under US copyright law, Freedom of Panorama does not apply to three-dimensional, gallery-displayed artwork such as 'Minidoka, which places them under copyright by default. Consequently, you would have to get permission from Wendy Maruyama to use a photograph of her sculpture on Wikipedia, even though you took it yourself. -- Fhsig13 (talk) 22:15, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the licensing to 3D since it's not a painting, but how is this any different from the (as of now) 2,522 images of 3D artwork with fair use tags? Since when do we need permission from the artist to take a picture, even when it's used under fair use? Can you point me to the site or link where this is stated? APK hi :-) (talk) 22:37, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per the "Artworks and sculptures" section of c:COM:FOP US: "For artworks, even if permanently installed in public places, the US copyright law has no similar exception, and any publication of an image of a copyrighted artwork thus is subject to the approval of the copyright holder of the artwork.". -- Fhsig13 (talk) 23:31, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So that's when Fair Use applies, correct? APK hi :-) (talk) 23:42, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please accept my apologies, I was not aware that a specific template existed to denote the use of non-free media of this type and purpose, when I nominated this file. I think now that you have re-licensed the image as you have, the image should be fine to use, per section 107 of the US copyright act, as stated in the license template. As such, I am asking that my my nomination be withdrawn, per WP:WITHDRAWN. -- Fhsig13 (talk) 02:18, 14 March 2024 (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.