Commons:Deletion requests/File:Madonna-holiday-1983-us-vinyl.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
It is a photo of a vinyl record taken by someone, not the uploader. I don't think it "only consists of simple geometric shapes or text", as the licensing reason. Bluesatellite (talk) 04:18, 17 June 2016 (UTC) Bluesatellite (talk) 04:18, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Keep: The label is the only thing depicted in this image. The background is whitened out, so you don't see the vinyl and stuff. Also, the information within the image is too factual. The Sire logo is not copyrightable. There is some dust on the label, but that shouldn't affect how free the image is. --George Ho (talk) 01:53, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Delete: Per nominator rationale. IndianBio (talk) 21:36, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
- There are other images of vinyl labels, IndianBio and Bluesatellite. Why not nominating them individually or discussing them as a whole? --George Ho (talk) 07:14, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- We are talking about this image here can you stick to it and not try to dissuade from it? IndianBio (talk) 08:41, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- This label... I don't see how it is copyrighted beyond the logo, the credits and other text. Are there elements that indicate copyright? --George Ho (talk) 17:07, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- We are talking about this image here can you stick to it and not try to dissuade from it? IndianBio (talk) 08:41, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- There are other images of vinyl labels, IndianBio and Bluesatellite. Why not nominating them individually or discussing them as a whole? --George Ho (talk) 07:14, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep - No copyrighteable content. All text only contains factual information. The logo is below the threshold of originality. The arrangement of the text is haphazard without any intent of design. The faithful photographic reproduction of a two-dimensional "work" does not establish any new copyright for the photographer. "Only consists of simple geometric shapes or text" fits the bill very accurately. --Latebird (talk) 05:40, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. —howcheng {chat} 16:48, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
