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) 06:40, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:FiveKwans FamilyTree.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Truejim (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

likely derivative of non-free content. Source cited is taewondo wikia, but this doesn't tell us anything about the source images' copyright status. FASTILY 07:22, 2 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: 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⚡ 03:02, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sweet Love by Anita Baker US vinyl.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by George Ho (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

I uploaded this image as "non-free" image a year ago. Then I took this to FFD discussion last year because I wasn't sure whether the generic company label is eligible for copyright. The result was "no consensus" due to lack of participation and huge backlog before File PROD was done. Over time and re-evaluating, I figured that the label doesn't qualify for copyright. The black and red background colors don't overlap each other as many vinyl labels by Columbia Records do; rather the invisible(?) border between the colors appears solid. The red forms like a sun, but I think the whole background is unoriginal. The paper material appears to have some texture, but I guess it's still not enough for copyright protection. Also, a lot of information contained in the label is too factual for copyright, and the expression of facts is unoriginal. Therefore, the image should be transferred to Commons. Of course, someone is welcomed to comment if the person disagrees. George Ho (talk) 21:29, 25 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) 06:42, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Houser, Apache Cradleboard.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by LEWhitfield (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

The museum may have allowed the photo, but the artist retains the copyright to the sculpture, no? Themightyquill (talk) 23:21, 2 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.