Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Unidentified logos

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.

Logos in Category:Unidentified logos which meet the threshold of originality

The license on these logos is PD-textlogo, however I beleive that these specific logos do actually meet the threshold of originality

Basvb (talk) 23:10, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:33, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Logos out of use with own work claim which are either unlikely own work or out of scope

These logos are all unused and claimed to be own work. The issue with these self-licensed and unused logos is that a lot of them are not actually own work, this is mainly the case with the more interesting logos (of notable subjects). It is very easy to download the logo of a company from their website, thus if they are going to be actually used they can be re-uploaded with correct license information. A lot of the logos are not even PD-ineligible (they contain creative work) and are therefore copyright violations, some of the logos of notable companies have multiple uploads of the same logo, of which another version is already in use. The other logos which are actually own work (I believe this will be a small subset) are mainly of non-notable subjects and therefore not in scope of commons (all nominations are of unused logos). These 56 logos are from a set of 100 logos in Category:Unidentified logos, depending on the arguments raised in this nomination I would take a look at the other logos in similar categories. I believe these categories are cluttered with material either unusable; in violation of copyrights of their rights owners or containing incorrect source and author attributions.

Basvb (talk) 14:39, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Many are too simple for copyright and should be renominated on an individual basis. Fry1989 ^eh? 21:01, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My argument is that they are either out of scope or incorrectly licensed. I'm not arguing that a large part (not all) of those logos isn't PD-textlogo. Mvg, Basvb (talk) 21:04, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted per nomination. --Krd 13:49, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files in Category:Unidentified logos

Unused logos of companies with no apparent notability, out of scope.

Sealle (talk) 03:46, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, as the argument about no apparent notability is false for the following:
- File:1992 New Zealand America's Cup Bid - R19592797 Embossed Logo (9811978716).jpg: it is also categorized as Category:1992 America's Cup; recategorized
- File:30262732996_2c8003ebed_okk.jpg: notability of subject; authenticity of design; recategorized (though: might be wrongly licensed; has a terrible filename; {{Badjpg}})
- File:2017 Houlihan Lokey logo.jpg: notability of subject; recategorized

There may be more cases. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 05:49, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the notable ones and Delete the others. --E4024 (talk) 07:20, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as to File:2011-365-26 Limited Logo (5391865931).jpg. On closer inspection, this is not merely a "logo" but is actually a photograph of that portion of the wing of the aircraft. It should be used, or available to use. BD2412 T 11:46, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- @BD2412: Continental's logo is non-free. Sealle (talk) 12:52, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - By itself, it would be non-free, but this is a picture of the wing, which happens to have the logo painted on it - not materially different from this picture of the plane, which happens to have the logo painted on the tail. An object does not fall out of the public domain merely because a logo is painted on the object. Otherwise, we would have to delete every photograph of an airplane (or bus, car, product package) that happened to capture the company logo painted on it. BD2412 T 13:08, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    - BD2412, please see COM:DM. Whole plane doesn't violate copyright, but this cropped photo of stabilizer (not a wing to be 100% accurate) does. Sealle (talk) 13:15, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      - What if someone wants to use it to illustrate this portion of a stabilizer? Or the application of livery to a stabilizer? I would add that this image is not the entire logo, and that this logo is merely a geometric shape - the contours of a sphere - which hardly expresses much originality, if any. It may be subject to trademark protection, but it is a dubious proposition that it is even subject to copyright. BD2412 T 03:30, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't mind, please also consider File:Hriaou.jpg for deletion. --E4024 (talk) 13:02, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- @E4024: Mark 5:9. There are tens of thousands of those to review. Sealle (talk) 13:31, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I could review only one. Have we also got thousands of volunteers in Commons? --E4024 (talk) 13:32, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't delete File:002 Logo RGB.svg, because it is the logo of an existing institute (HIIG) in Berlin and has it's own wikipedia entry. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by FlorianLuedtke (talk • contribs) 2017-08-08 17:20:38 (UTC)
- @FlorianLuedtke: this svg looks broken/of bad quality. Should be fixed and then included in article, otherwise it can be deleted. XXN, 10:42, 12 August 2017 (UTC) P.S. it may be copyrighted and above the COM:TOO, but eventually this could be discussed in a separate DR[reply]

Deleted: most, kept some per discussion, I also found usage for two more. --Jcb (talk) 21:03, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Unidentified logos

Logos in Category:Unidentified logos which meet the threshold of originality

Logos out of use with own work claim which are either unlikely own work or out of scope

Files in Category:Unidentified logos

Navigation menu

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Unidentified logos

Logos in Category:Unidentified logos which meet the threshold of originality

Logos out of use with own work claim which are either unlikely own work or out of scope

Files in Category:Unidentified logos

Navigation menu

Search

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.