Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Firefox 1 5 0 3.png

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
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.

Image:Firefox_1_5_0_3.png

[edit]

Legally non-free pictures shouldn't be used to illustrate free software. The following images are {{CopyrightByWikimedia}}, and should be replaced with ones showing non-Wikipedia websites that are freely licensed so that they do not hinder free use. Also, do we REALLY have to demonstrate everything with Wikimedia logos? We've got a WHOLE COLLECTION OF IMAGES you can use here to demonstrate stuff. ViperSnake151 (talk) 17:31, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This also applies to:

This list will keep growing though as I purge through Category:Copyright by Wikimedia. It's pretty unfortunate that I have to do this, but I don't think nominative non-free images of Wikipedia should be used to illustrate things that aren't specifically Wikipedia. ViperSnake151 (talk) 17:39, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I made a list using a database scanner. All GPLs ({{GPL}} and {{LGPL}}) that uses {{CbW}} (And its redirects) are listed there. Note: This list is out of date, but it is useful.--OsamaK 21:05, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
How about doing the same for ones that include {{Free screenshot}} as well? Lewis Collard! (lol, internet) 21:19, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
NASA produce a fair number of free websites US army would be another option.Geni (talk)

 Keep Screenshots of Wikipedia pages are GFDL, except for the Wikipedia logo which is De minimis and may be tagged with {{CopyrightByWikimedia}}. Tcrow777 Talk 01:07, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Question Has someone in the Foundation seen a similar deletion request, and commented about whether we should do in such cases? Diti (talk to the penguin) 17:33, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep The use of a trademarked logo in an image does not make the image any less free. For example, look at Time square by Monobi.jpg, which contains numerous trademarked logos. Is that image encumbered by their presence? I think not, but you may also look here for a detailed discussion, with both sides of the argument well-represented.
You are confusing trademark with copyright here. Its COM:DM in those cases, incidental. For most of these cases, its purposely using a Wikipedia web page, and thus, is non-free, no matter what excuses you make. ViperSnake151 (talk) 11:43, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey people, I just uploaded another one, Image:Mozilla Firefox Commons with Mantis.jpg This one shows a Image here on commons but no Wikimedia('pedia, 'Commons) logo's only the Firefox logo as usual. Is this one okay? I'd like to hear from ya guys soon. Kind regards, Matthias92 (talk) 20:50, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a description of the licensing to the image page. You may want to make a screenshot without the non-free logo and extensions. There are also some icons which I do not recognize. --AVRS (talk) 16:05, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Probarly the mediaplayer and the weatherbug? When I make a new screenshot, which parts shouldn't be shown, only the mozillaFirefox logo or also other parts? By the way thanx for the licensing! Matthias92 (talk) 21:54, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It'd be better to avoid all the non-free parts. The media player buttons may be ineligible for copyright (not sure about them together, though), but WeatherBug hardly is. Not sure about the Mozilla M on the right; the Google search engine can be changed to Creative Commons, whose icon is more trivial (though trademarked) and at worst is under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Get rid of the dictionary icon / bookmark in the shot; and having Hotmail there is just a shame ;-). --AVRS (talk) 22:18, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hahaha, I'll see what I can do. I think I'm gonna make a new shot, or I'll play a bit with Paint, that will do! Hey, about the Hotmail, I'm a dutch boy and 16 years old, so I just have to (stereotype) :)
Maybe this one: Image:Mozilla Firefox Commons with Mantis2.jpg? Matthias92 (talk) 12:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Firefox logo is still there. The place where the Google logo was is overdone. It wasn't necessary to remove the word “Adblock”.
  • Also, you can upload a new version of the image under the same name, using a special link at the bottom.
  • This discussion is a bit of off-topic here, since this page is about Wikimedia logos.
--AVRS (talk) 16:39, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I see, but if I'd take away the Firefox logo, than wat's left, than what's the difference between Internet Explorer or Safari and M Firefox? Matthias92 (talk) 16:58, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
However, this one fits in to your guidelines. Matthias92 (talk) 17:39, 17 September 2008 (UTC) [reply]
I didn't mean you shouldn't remove the Google logo; it's just that you have erased a part of the arrow with it in version 2. But you should upload the new versions with the same sense over the old ones; they will still be available through the list below, and the non-free ones can be deleted as well without the last one having a useless number at the end.
The best difference is that you can legally edit the screenshot and upload it to Commons. Non-free extensions make it hard to capture the difference in a free screenshot, but it is possible to avoid them.
--AVRS (talk) 19:45, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, but is there no possibility to rename the images? However, shall I upload another one, the same like number 3 but without the google logo/trademark? (but with an unbroken arrow:-) I'll give it another name without numbers so we can nominate the others for {{Speedydelete}}. We don't need the older versions, do we? Kind regards, Matthias92 (talk) 21:20, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(Resetting identation to 1)
It is (almost) impossible to rename an image, but it is possible to delete an image no matter if it has its own name, or if it is only a “version” sharing a name with others. The difference is that the description lives its own life (except when all of the images are deleted), so when someone reverts or uploads a new version of the image, the description stays unchanged (and vice-versa). The upside of that is that history for all the versions is in one place. Deleting an unused image no one really needs is easy and safe – it can be restored, if you know or can find the file name. Creating too many useless names or versions is not very good, since they are not really deleted. --AVRS (talk) 14:20, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All kept. Please direct any questions to my talk page. --O (谈 • висчвын) 21:57, 21 September 2008 (GMT)

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Image:Firefox_1_5_0_3.png&oldid=418384813"