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 ⚡ 13:25, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These are all images of statues and stained glass windowpane art, and cemetery (non-building) architecture from a list article, however there is no FOP for statues or 3D displayed artworks in the US. These images also cannot likely be kept as non-free either, as that would likely violate WP:NFLISTS, due to a lack of sourced critical commentary related to the images. Lastly, the cemetery image is now redundant to a better version on Commons, so it need not be kept either. FHSIG13 ^TALK 07:18, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that all nominated images apart from File:Sodcemetery.jpg should be deleted as freedom of panorama violations if they cannot be relicensed as non-free content. What exactly is the copyrightable element claimed in File:Sodcemetery.jpg though? Landmarks and monuments of Florida State University claims that the cemetery dates from 1937, which would render elements without a copyright notice public domain. Felix QW (talk) 10:15, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: It should also be noted that the uploader has a history of copyright violations. Given the lack of metadata and small file sizes, I am also doubtful that these photos are the uploader's "own work" as claimed. Any photos of non-2D artworks should be retaken if we are to use them in articles. Ixfd64 (talk) 20:36, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Felix QW Thank you for clarifying that File:Sodcemetery.jpg does not violate FOP, as I was originally unsure of that, which is why I decided nominate that image as well. As for @Ixfd64's concerns about Mgreasons' claim of "own work", a Google Lens search confirmed that the image in question has not previously been published anywhere else online, so I'm not sure if there is grounds for deletion of this specific image on that basis, despite the uploaders' past transgressions. ~~In consideration of both preceding points, I have struck the cemetery image from the nomination.~~ FHSIG13 ^TALK 22:40, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel dubious about the remaining Sod cemetery image, we also have this one from Commons. Felix QW (talk) 11:16, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Felix QW Thanks, that's a good find! That Commons image is better than the existing one for sure, and as such I am re-nominating File:Sodcemetery.jpg for deletion on that basis. FHSIG13 ^TALK 21:05, 23 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.

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 ⚡ 13:25, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Invalid fair use on List of 2024 Indian Premier League personnel changes, as that is not a specific article on the auction itself, and so is not the logo of the article as claimed. As such, fails WP:NFCC#8 too. Note that this article was previously using File:Tata ipl auction 2024.jpg which is also at FFD for the same reason. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:08, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The Article mostly includes information about the Auction, Pre-auction stats (e.g: retained players) and Post-auction changes (e.g: withdrawn players). And the Infobox is titled as 2024 Indian Premier League Auction, which is what the logo is also about. 𝓥𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓪𝓷24𝓑𝓲𝓸 (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 10:10, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Article is a list of which only a part is about the auction. Fails WP:NFCC#8. -- Whpq (talk) 20:31, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per @Whpq, the image is not related to the entirety of the articles' subject, and so it fails WP:NFCC#8. FHSIG13 ^TALK 22:47, 22 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.

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 ⚡ 02:03, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is an alternate cover for the album. It is a Christmas edition which is substantially similar to the standard cover but with a different colour background and sparkles added. Fails WP:NFCC#8, WP:NFCC#3a. Whpq (talk) 20:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per nom, the image fails both of the above-named WP:NFCCP criteria, due to the presence of the standard album cover, as well as a lack of sourced critical commentary relating to the image in question. FHSIG13 ^TALK 22:49, 22 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.

March 22

File:EdwardConradiStatue.jpg

File:TATA IPL Auction 2024 Logo.jpg

File:Amarantine (Special Christmas Edition).jpg