The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:07, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

low resolution likely from website - Jayanta Nath ^{(Talk|Contrb)} 09:55, 20 October 2009 (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 images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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: kept with license & FuR updated. Skier Dude (talk) 02:39, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
it's a logo, and there is no explanation as to why it is freely licensed 78.111.169.36 (talk) 11:12, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, in fact, their website's terms and conditions place restrictions on their graphics that are incompatible with Wikipedia's policies. --LarryGilbert (talk) 17:04, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, a case might be made for NFCC, but I don't feel comfortable making that call. --LarryGilbert (talk) 17:09, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After reading Wikipedia:Logos, I think we could keep this as long as the ((trademark)) and ((svg)) tags are removed and replaced with ((non-free logo|regtrademark=yes)). I'm still unsure about the appropriateness of moving it to Commons. --LarryGilbert (talk) 17:53, 20 October 2009 (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 inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:07, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader stated that it was scanned from a newspaper advert. See file history. Brianhe (talk) 19:32, 20 October 2009 (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 images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:07, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

looks like an image grabbed from some website. Unused. Rettetast (talk) 20:05, 20 October 2009 (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 images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.