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. Killiondude (talk) 08:18, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:A Song for You (Bizzy Bone song).jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Weekinger (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This image was previously nominated for deletion because it was mistaken as an extra album cover for the album whose name is similar to the song, "A Song for You". The mistake was realized, so the nomination was withdrawn. I'm doing the second FFD for a different reason: the front cover of the Bizzy Bone single release is not helping readers understand the song. Indeed, the article about the song briefly mentions the Bizzy Bone rendition and its music video. However, very little or no sources mention the rendition, especially news articles. There are sources, but the Billboard issues listed just the album of the same name on music charts, not the song. This image fails WP:NFCC#8 ("contextual significance"). George Ho (talk) 05:22, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This is a non-notable cover version that does not needs its own section/infobox/cover image in the article. All of the information in the section should be reduced down to one sentence and placed in the cover versions section. Aspects (talk) 23:33, 29 December 2017 (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⚡ 22:11, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mary Lyon postage stamp 1987.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by BobCC (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Hello, I came across this file while patrolling new uploads, I know the image's current licensing is incorrect (per C:Commons:Stamps/Public domain#1978 onward) as stamps produced after 1978 in the USA are not in the public domain. However I would like clarification on if the image could be used on the Mary Lyon article. Currently the image is not in use and should be subject to deletion per WP:F5 and possibly WP:F6. --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 05:39, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Cameron11598: I find it very unlikely that NFCC#8 could be met, an image of a postage stamp is almost certainly not going to enrich the article much. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:46, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: Thats what I was thinking but wanted to verify my track. in this case I'm thinking this image should be deleted then --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 19:47, 31 December 2017 (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. Killiondude (talk) 03:23, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Margaret Mitchell usps 1986.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by BobCC (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

The licensing on this image is incorrect, stamps produced in the USA by the postal service after 1978 are subject to copyright see C:Commons:Stamps/Public_domain#1978_onward. This image is being used on an article however I'm not certain it could be used under a fair use rational. Could I get some more perspectives on this? Thanks! --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 05:56, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

After doing some research 'delete per WP:NFCC#8 --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 00:10, 1 January 2018 (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: Relicensed as free use. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:47, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rugbyfest-uk-logo.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by StuartJMackintosh (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

The logo is used in only one article (RugbyFest, and it can be argued that the article can be illustrated by having a Wikipedian take a picture at the event, should it be held next year. Kiteinthewind ^{Leave a message!} 19:06, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Licensing changed to PD-ineligible-USonly as the logo falls below the TOO in my opinion. Usage on the article is appropriate even if it was licensed as a fairuse logo. Salavat (talk) 15:06, 24 December 2017 (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: relisted on 2017 December 31. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:47, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Logo candidature Iekaterinburg - Expo 2025.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

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.