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-ineligible-USonly)). ✗plicit 06:48, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Stateside-logo.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by 718 Bot (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

A dollar sign posing as an "S" in a black box and the whole cursive typeface don't make the whole logo sufficient for the Stateside Records logo to meet US copyright, IMO. However, the record label was founded by EMI, so that makes the logo British. The UK law has very low originality standards (c:COM:TOO UK), and the logo may be sufficient for UK copyright. Perhaps I can stand corrected about this. George Ho (talk) 00:09, 18 February 2022 (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⚡ 08:05, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:NEO N64 Myth Cart Front.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Link83 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Unused derivative work of non-free packaging. Ixfd64 (talk) 00:26, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 05:29, 19 February 2022 (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⚡ 08:05, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Two separate images, both are unused derivative works of presumably non-free book covers. Ixfd64 (talk) 00:28, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 05:29, 19 February 2022 (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⚡ 08:05, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Afroman - Because I Got High (Afrolicious Edit).ogg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Tchernomush (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

The whole song may have received more YouTube and Spotify views. However, unconvinced that the exact portion of first verse heard in the sample is proven as contextually significant to the whole song. The lyrics I heard in the sample are potentially easy to summarize in text. George Ho (talk) 01:20, 18 February 2022 (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⚡ 08:05, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Young Folks.ogg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Seer10J (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Exact portion of "Young Folks" by Kanye West not proven contextually significant to Can't Tell Me Nothing (mixtape). Description about the portion insufficient to justify usage. George Ho (talk) 01:31, 18 February 2022 (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⚡ 08:05, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Iron Maiden Purgatory 29 second file.ogg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Ceoil (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Even as the last remaining sample in heavy metal music as of date, and even when the sample's length can be trimmed down, I wonder whether a portion of Purgatory (song) is necessary to convey the sounds of the genre... or the music. The article doesn't mention the song outside the captions. Furthermore, the song article barely has or doesn't have sufficient critical commentary to justify/support the song portion. Moreover, hopefully, the text can help readers already convey what the music sounds like, and there's one free clip File:Heavy rythmic pattern audio.ogg, even when it's not a song portion. Readers can listen to other whole (and I mean "whole"... or full) song recordings to further understand the genre/music if they wish. Meanwhile, I still can't tell from the sample represents either typical rock music or heavy rock. It would belong in the band article Iron Maiden, but it already has three samples there. Adding the sample as the fourth would be too much to ask, wouldn't it? George Ho (talk) 04:04, 18 February 2022 (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⚡ 08:05, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Faludi-stiffed.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by DanB DanD (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Superseded and replaced by File:Stiffed by Susan Faludi first US hardcover edition.png. George Ho (talk) 05:52, 18 February 2022 (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⚡ 08:05, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

A screenshot of Alicia Silverstone and Liv Tyler in the music video of Crazy (Aerosmith song), even when to identify them in the scene, doesn't add much contextual understanding to the whole song or the subject of discussion. In case of deletion, probably free images of the actresses should suffice. George Ho (talk) 06:38, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I agree. The two exiting a gas station doesn't really encapsulate the theme of the song/video. ResPM (T🔈🎵C) 13:26, 18 February 2022 (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: no consensus. ✗plicit 06:49, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tony Toni Tone - If I Had No Loot.ogg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Piotr Jr. (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

If article improvements are desired, then the "If I Had No Loot" article can be improved without hesitation. However, I'm unsure whether improvements can help the whole sample be more contextually significant to the whole song and irreplaceable by text. Assumption of sufficient critical commentary was a rationale for de-PRODding several months back. I just couldn't list the sample here because I just wanna go slow on nominating samples for FFD until I'm ready to increase nominations on samples.

Reading the article, I think readers may understand musical terms, which I think are not that musically challenging, and song references without the sample. I heard lyrics (probably the chorus) and the music in the sample, but I think they would be easy to convey and summarize in text, making the sample potentially redundant. Furthermore, the "Music and lyrics" section, into where I pulled the sample down from the infobox, mentions other songs but is kinda brief on the song itself. Moreover, I think an average reader may understand "new jack swing" and "a tempo of 108 beats per minute" without the sample, right? If audio identification, i.e. audio recognition, helps the portion itself be contextually significant enough to the song, then... well, great. However, sadly, I'm unconvinced how and why the portion I'm listing here has done more than just helping readers recognize the portion itself. George Ho (talk) 08:35, 11 February 2022 (UTC); edited, 08:41, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep since there is enough critical commentary to justify its inclusion in the song article. Aspects (talk) 04:09, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:35, 18 February 2022 (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: Textbook WP:NFCC#8 violation. No prejudice to restoration if the article is significantly expanded to explicitly discuss this sample in-depth -FASTILY 06:52, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Krungthep Mahanakhon sample.ogg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Sam (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

The file is a song by Asanee–Wasan about the native Thai full name of Bangkok, which is used to illustrate the popularity of that full name among Thais. However, the main focus of the article is neither that piece of song nor the etymology of Bangkok (in other words, the song itself is not the subject of commentary of the article), and it is proposed that plain text explanation is sufficient in describing the content. The file therefore violates WP:SAMPLE and WP:NFCC#8, and should be deleted. 廣九直通車 (talk) 13:21, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep -- I think it meets the referenced critera by my reading of the policy. This sample has lived in this article for many years without any objection. -- SamuelWantman 19:53, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I'm unsure what "referenced criteria" the uploader was referring to. The other rule added to WP:NFC#CS last year was removed recently for lacking consensus. Even with the "referenced" criterion, I remain unconvinced why the free text conveying brief info about the whole song itself isn't adequate without the sample. Free text already tells readers that its lyrics contains just city names. Furthermore, living in the article for many years without any objection still doesn't excuse the sample's potential failure to comply with NFCC. Well, I think "without any objection" was editors' preoccupancy with other articles and probably hadn't bothered to challenge the use of the sample. BTW, there are free audio clips of the Thai language in Commons if anyone wants to learn more about the language. George Ho (talk) 20:42, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I previously listed this at Wikipedia:Non-free content review/Archive 19#File:Krungthep Mahanakhon sample.ogg in 2012, though it generated no further input then. --Paul_012 (talk) 04:07, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for your additional information. Regarding Sam's defence on contextual significance, it requires the fair use content to significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, like . As we know the lyrics only contains the full Thai name of Bangkok, it simply don't add onto the article's contextual significance. In my opinion unless it can be proved that that song did greatly improved Bangkok's full city name among Thais, the nominated file fails NFCC8, regards.廣九直通車 (talk) 07:42, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Many Thais who recall the full name do so because of its use in the 1989 song "Krung Thep Maha Nakhon" by Thai rock band Asanee–Wasan, the lyrics of which consist entirely of the city's full name, repeated throughout the song. Hurray! We did it. Easily fails WP:FREER: "Could the subject be adequately conveyed by properly sourced text without using the non-free content at all?" Clearly. ✗plicit 00:24, 26 February 2022 (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⚡ 02:00, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:ReferendumAgeScatter.JPG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Lilac Soul (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Support deletion - unused raster image that was not used to create the corresponding vector image and thus is not needed for attribution purposes HouseBlaster^talk 16:41, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, redundant to SVG file. Salavat (talk) 05:32, 19 February 2022 (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: Procedural close/not actionable. Open for a couple weeks with no comments. Please direct specific source/copyright questions to Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thanks, FASTILY 05:49, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Theme from Shaft by Isaac Hayes US single rainbow crescent variant.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by George Ho (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Uploaded this as free, but I've not yet seen any Enterprise Records logo as free to use in Commons. Honestly, I really thought the logo using a crescent and a circle to form an "E" substitute isn't minimally creative for US copyright. Also, I really thought the big rainbow logo are just using simple shapes to form a simple crescent half of the logo. Perhaps I can stand corrected about the whole image. George Ho (talk) 23:59, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Only posted short rationale just to quickly list the image, but I'll provide more. The Enterprise Records was a US label belong to US company Stax Records, making the logo an American work. More likely, like a gallery of other logos seen in c:COM:TOO US, it may likely be below the US's originality threshold. George Ho (talk) 00:03, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify more what should be done, if ineligible for copyright, then it should be transferred to Commons. Otherwise, no objections to deletion if being non-free is implied. George Ho (talk) 02:43, 24 February 2022 (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.