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 as non-free -FASTILY 00:07, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:AMAA Who’s who in martial arts award plaque, 2018.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Australianblackbelt (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Photo of a 2018 award plaque, containing multiple copyrightable elements (eagle and flag artwork in particular). Though the uploader took the photo, the plaque itself should be assumed to be copyrighted. Wikiacc (¶) 05:50, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as non-free (as nominator), WP:NFCC all appear to be met. Wikiacc (¶) 05:19, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment What if the recipient was holding the award plaque like many news sources have been publishing? Is there no “fair use” that applies here? Australianblackbelt (talk) 15:35, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Australianblackbelt: It depends on how the image is used in the article. See WP:NFCC. Wikiacc (¶) 05:04, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Wikiacc: it was used as the image for the article about the award that image is of => AMAA Who's Who in the Martial Arts Hall of Fame, just like a book cover about a book or a movie poster about a movie. Australianblackbelt (talk) 05:17, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Australianblackbelt: if you follow all the steps at WP:NONFREE and make a convincing case that all the criteria are met, then the image won't be deleted. Wikiacc (¶) 05:21, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Wikiacc: I have updated the licensing information I hope it is correct as I have never done this before https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:AMAA_Who%E2%80%99s_who_in_martial_arts_award_plaque,_2018.jpg Australianblackbelt (talk) 06:13, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Australianblackbelt: I'd recommend adding more detail on why all the criteria are met. The template ((Non-free use rationale 2)) might help. Wikiacc (¶) 06:16, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
          • @Wikiacc: Thanks it's done I believe that should do the trick. Australianblackbelt (talk) 06:57, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I concur with the nominator's analysis. -- Whpq (talk) 02:44, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Whpq: would you consider changing your vote to "keep as non-free" or similar? Wikiacc (¶) 05:19, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • For use as primary visual identification, I have no objections to non-free usage. I would just point out that the rationale should have the purpose corrcted to state it is for visual identification as the article is not about the image, but about the hall of fame which this award represents. -- Whpq (talk) 12:55, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Wikiacc: I want to thank you for not simply doing a speedy deletion in this case and giving me a chance to correct the issue unlike the user Nick who just speedy deleted all the logos I uploaded without so much as a mention to me. For someone like me that has created like 20 new articles and weeks of my time I appreciate being treated with the respect you have given me. Australianblackbelt (talk) 03:15, 10 January 2021 (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: Missing evidence of permission. If you are the copyright holder, please follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials to get the file restored -FASTILY 00:07, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ruffle Demo.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Themadprogramer (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Alien Hominid is not 70 years old and is under copyright Veverve (talk) 06:48, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Screenshot of non-free video game. No evidence of CC0 license and doubtful own work. Dylsss^{(talk contribs)} 10:25, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep.

1. Based on previous discussion on Wikipedia regarding software screenshots, it is my understanding that this qualifies as fair-use seeing as 1) Ruffle is open-source software and 2) The Flash version of Alien Hominid is free software.
2. In response to the above comment, this is indeed my original work and was screenshot for a post I edited for a friend.
3. I am prepared to demonstrate that I have Alien Hominid developer Tom Fulp's personal approval on behalf of The Behemoth, stating they see no conflict of interest, in the use of this file for this particular Wikipedia page, in any case.

Themadprogramer (talk) 13:14, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Themadprogramer, so the flash version of Alien Hominid is freely licensed? Note that it has to be licensed freely, just because the game itself is free to use does not mean that there is no copyright. To clarify, I meant that it is doubtful that you were the copyright holder of Alien Hominid, not that you took the screesnhot. If you can get the developer to email permissions-enwikimedia.org, than they can license this specific screenshot freely. This could be re-licensed as fair use, but I feel it would fail WP:NFCC#1 as you could therotically use a freely licensed Flash game to emulate instead. Dylsss^{(talk contribs)} 15:19, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dylsss, this is the first time I've run into something like this, so what exactly would the mail to permissions-enwikimedia.org entail? A link to the image file or a reupload? A statement on "Yes you have my permission to fair use it?". I would appreciate it if you could refer me to a guide on what to do in this case. Themadprogramer (talk) 23:39, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Themadprogramer, see Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries, there is more information at c:COM:OTRS as well. Permission isn't needed to use a work under the fair use doctrine, but it should be done in accordance with the policy at WP:NFC. Dylsss^{(talk contribs)} 00:01, 11 January 2021 (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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:02, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Copperhead Strike (Carowinds) 2019 01.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by McDuckScrooge (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

First published at https://www.flickr.com/photos/thescorpionlair/46543826675/ under a non-commercial license. Dylsss^{(talk contribs)} 16:14, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - The image is not under a free license. As well, the uploader has added a non-free usage rationale after the nomination was made, but this is an existing rollercoaster so it is a clear fail of WP:NFCC#1. -- Whpq (talk) 02:49, 7 January 2021 (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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:02, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:WAReds logo.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Gibson Flying V (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Per WP:NFCC#8. Logo is not being used to identify the club as stated in the rationale, and while the logo is mentioned in the text, there's no actual discussion of the art. Ytoyoda (talk) 20:09, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - There is no significant sourced commentary about this former logo that would meet WP:NFCC#8. -- Whpq (talk) 02:51, 7 January 2021 (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.