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. Whpq (talk) 14:05, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Southern Cross Ten.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Trisreed (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Does not satisfy WP:NFCC#8. The image is not used as the primary means of visual identification. The use of historical logos for an entity is not allowed unless the historical logo itself is described in the context of sourced critical commentary about that historical logo. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:50, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the purpose of use in article Bassie f (talk) 04:17, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to serve as one of two means of visual identification at the bottom of the first 10 affiliation section in the article Bassie f (talk) 04:18, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't address the issue. — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:39, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why not @JJMC89 Bassie f (talk) 04:43, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is with how the file is used, which you have done nothing about. See the last part of WP:NFC#CS plus the footnote for WP:NFCI#2 (which is in my nomination statement). — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:18, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is definitely a historical logo for 10 (Southern Cross Austereo). Can you or someone else change the purpose of this file being used in that article to reflect that after this discussion concludes. Bassie f (talk) 05:26, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But the image is used as the second logo of Southern Cross Ten. Bassie f (talk) 09:50, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Changed the purpose again (to serve as the second and last Southern Cross Ten logo) Bassie f (talk) 20:03, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Does not meet WP:NFCC#8 as currently used. Upon reviewing the text of the article, I found no substantial sourced critical commentary/coverage. -FASTILY 07:14, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per my changes to the purpose of the file. Bassie f (talk) 07:35, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  As I said before, nothing you have done has addressed the reason for deletion. — JJMC89 (T·C) 07:47, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I have addressed the reason for deletion by adding a source featuring the logo to the 10 (Southern Cross Austereo) article. Bassie f (talk) 07:53, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  So Keep for adding a source featuring the logo. Bassie f (talk) 07:56, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Noting the bad WP:NAC closure, which I have reverted.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:00, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Earlier yesterday, I added a source featuring the logo to the 10 (Southern Cross Austereo) article, which is why I said keep. Bassie f (talk) 02:03, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This logo debuted and launched on 14 August 2005. Bassie f (talk) 02:22, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, while a current logo can be justified for nonfree use as a visual identifier, that is not true for past logos. There is not sufficient sourced commentary on the logo itself to justify an exception in this case. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 13:12, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  In addition, the nonfree rationale is incomplete, with two sections marked "n.a." rather than being appropriately filled out. But even if this were corrected, the file still would not be appropriate for use. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 13:13, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Changed purpose again (to serve as the second and last Southern Cross Ten logo for historical purposes) Bassie f (talk) 20:30, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment, I corrected the non-free rationale, just letting everyone know.

  Bassie f (talk) 21:04, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  None of these are helpful changes, nor are they doing anything to prevent the file from being deleted. Please stop making edits to the page. Thanks, FASTILY 02:38, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I have already stopped, Fastily. Bassie f (talk) 04:20, 15 January 2023 (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. Whpq (talk) 14:06, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:We're All Alone - Frankie Valli.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by JGabbard (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

If one of releases of the Frankie Valli recording shall be displayed to illustrate critical commentary, then the one I uploaded (File:Were all alone by frankie valli US single side-A.png) shall be used instead. The Dutch cover art must go. George Ho (talk) 02:54, 9 January 2023 (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 F8 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 08:30, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Big 98-3 Indianapolis 2015.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Mega-buses (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This image only contains simple text/shapes and is thus ineligible for copyright due to being below the required threshold of originality. License should thus be changed to ((PD-textlogo)). 2600:1700:9DD0:8FD0:B4D2:11BF:54D:DBA2 (talk) 16:07, 9 January 2023 (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⚡ 02:01, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gail huff 2012.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Herblouise945 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Unable to verify the license as the source video is no longer available. Image is not used anywhere. Ixfd64 (talk) 18:51, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 06:21, 14 January 2023 (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.