< March 1	March 3 >

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 image four; speedy delete images one and three under F8; keep image two as is, as the lighting effects of the background may be considered too complex. — ξ ^xplicit 04:06, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Each file is a non-free logo being used in WFXR. I think "File:Wwcw 2011.png", "File:WFXR27.png" and "File:WFXR WWCW.png" might be simple enough to be converted to ((PD-logo)), but I don't believe the same can be said for "File:Current WFXR 10pm News Opening.png". "File:Wwcw 2011.png" is essentially the same as File:The CW.svg found on Commons with a number "5" added, while "File:WFXR27.png" and "File:WFXR WWCW.png" also seem too simple based upon c:Category:Logos of Fox Channels and c:Category:Fox television logos.

Each of the these logos has a non-free use rationale for WFXR, but only the non-free use of "File:Wwcw 2011.png" and "File:WFXR27.png" seem to satisfy WP:NFCC. The non-free use of "File:WFXR WWCW.png" and "File:Current WFXR 10pm News Opening.png", on the other hand, does not satisfy WP:NFCC#8 in my opinion because the logos themselves are not the subject of any sourced commentary within the article and the contextual significance required by NFCC#8 is lacking. The reader does not really need to see either logo to understand the paragraph in WFXR#Merger with WJPR/WWCW about the "Fox 21/27" brand or that the station re-titled editions of its 10:00 p.m. newscast to "WFXR News First at 10" in WFXR#Newscasts. I'm referring to ""File:Current WFXR 10pm News Opening.png" as a logo because that's how it's copyrighted (((Non-free logo))), but it actually seems to be more of a screenshot (((Non-free television screenshot))) than a logo per se.

Anyway, I suggest keep for "File:Wwcw 2011.png" and "File:WFXR27.png", and remove for "File:WFXR WWCW.png" and "File:Current WFXR 10pm News Opening.png" if these are too complex to be freely licensed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:16, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've uploaded File:WFXR WWCW.png to Commons. There appear to be a higher resolution copy of the file which has been deleted per WP:F5, and that higher resolution copy should preferably be uploaded to Commons too.

File:Wwcw 2011.png is also ((PD-textlogo)), but the source link is dead, so I can't verify that the logo is correct. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:55, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Stefan2: I found this subpage from the station's official website. Is that sufficient to serve as a source for the file? -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:16, 3 March 2016 (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.

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: convert to PD and tag for Commons czar 03:53, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free logos being used in WGEM-TV and WGEM-DT3. Each file has a non-free use rationale for their respective usages, but both of these logos seem to fall below the threshold of originality for copyright protection. "File:WGEM10-FOX" is nothing but text while the NBC peacock in "File:Wgemlogo.png" does not seem eligible for copyright based upon c:Category:NBC logos. I think both of these can be converted to ((PD-logo)) and tagged with ((Copy to Wikimedia Commons)). -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:33, 2 March 2016 (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.

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: speedy delete images two and three under F8; delete image two as nominated, as the background may be too complex. — ξ ^xplicit 04:06, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free former logos being used in WGEM-DT3. Each of these logos has a non-free use rationale, but none of them are themselves the subject of any sourced commentary within the article or being used as the primary means of identification for the station in the infobox so the contextual significance required by WP:NFCC#8 is lacking. All of these logos, however, seem to fall below the threshold of originality for copyright protection and can probably be converted to ((PD-logo)) (and tagged with ((Copy to Wikimedia Commons))). The first two seem obvious to me, but "File:Cgem.JPG" might be cutting it a bit close. However, since File:1987-1993 Fox B&W logo.svg, File:Newsatten.png and File:Foxwilmington.png already exist on Commons (assuming their licensing is accurate), then I think even this is probably OK. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:01, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article seems a bit cluttered with logos at this point. Taking a few off could be beneficial aesthetically. Personally, I see nothing wrong with merging the two subchannels (WGEM-DT2, WGEM-DT3) into the main WGEM-TV article. (Tigerghost (talk) 15:41, 16 March 2016 (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.

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 as G7 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a logo as claimed, and I am not seeing anything obvious in the image from an architectural perspective that would make this non-free? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:09, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete if really non-free. I don't see how the current non-free usage satisfies WP:NFCC#1 or WP:NFCC#8. The photo itself does not seem to be the subject of any sourced discussion within WCBT so the context required by NFCC#8 seems to be lacking; moreover, not sure why somebody couldn't essentially take the same photo and freely license it to create a free equivalent to serve the same encyclopedic purpose per NFCC#1. The non-free use rationale states the purpose is "to serve as the primary means of visual identification at the top of the article dedicated to the entity in question" which doesn't reflect how the image is cuurently being used at all and the "To show the unique color of the radio station's studio building" given for WP:NFCC#3 doesn't make sense much sense when it comes to minimal use. Maybe the uploader is also the phtographer? Can't they just upload this to Commons as ((PD-Self)) if they are?

Finally, it's not technically being discussed here, but I think File:WCBT-AM 2016.png used in the infobox of WCBT is probably too simple to be eligible for copyright protection and is a candidate for ((PD-logo)) and ((Copy to Wikimedia Commons)). -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:19, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I have corrected the non-free mistake and released it under PD-Self, with proper credit to the author of the image. Out of force of habit, because I typically work with radio logos, I marked the image as a logo. I asked for and received permission to use the image. So PD-Self, with proper credit, should suffice. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:26, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is no evidence that the file is licensed under ((PD-self)). The Twitter page only shows that the file is licensed under ((db-f3)). --Stefan2 (talk) 22:32, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Image has been db-author'd. WAAAY too much annoyance over an image of a radio station's studios. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:59, 2 March 2016 (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.

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 ⚡ 06:03, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

low quality/blurry screencap, possible derivative of non-free content, no encyclopedic value FASTILY 11:10, 2 March 2016 (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.

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 ⚡ 06:03, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

low quality/blurry screencap, possible derivative of non-free content, no encyclopedic value FASTILY 11:10, 2 March 2016 (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.

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 ⚡ 06:03, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

low quality/blurry screencap, possible derivative of non-free content, no encyclopedic value FASTILY 11:10, 2 March 2016 (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.

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 ⚡ 02:02, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFG. Stefan2 (talk) 21:38, 2 March 2016 (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.

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 ⚡ 06:03, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ineffective crop of File:Duracell AA.jpg. Original serves purpose more effectively. Cloudbound (talk) 21:54, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fine with me. Image is now nearly 9 years old, and I see I didn't really crop it down much at all. Don't remember what that was done for.. -- DMahalko (talk) 08:18, 3 March 2016 (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.

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 ⚡ 06:03, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a coat of arms, then under commons:Commons:Coat of arms it may fail WP:NFCC#1 since the coat could be recreated as a free image. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:59, 2 March 2016 (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.

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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons. Please nominate it for deletion there if you still feel it should be deleted. AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:13, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Low quality. This is one of the worst photos I have ever seen. McLerristarr | Mclay1 22:05, 2 March 2016 (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.

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 ⚡ 06:03, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8, see MOS:FILM#Soundtrack. Stefan2 (talk) 22:14, 2 March 2016 (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.

March 2

Non-free logos in WFXR

WGEM logos

Former WGEM-DT3 logos

File:WCBT-AM Studios 2016.PNG

File:RTV Pink 1997.png

File:RTV Pink 2003.jpg

File:RTV Pink 1995-2002.jpg

File:Manhattan Projects comp.jpg

File:Duracell AA crop.JPG

File:Haberdashers' Aske's School for Girls Coat of Arms.png

File:John Early TIMF.jpg

File:Deer Hunter soundtrack cover.jpg