Commons:Deletion requests/File:标志.jpg
Company logo used for advertisement. Out of scope. Jafeluv (talk) 11:48, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Delete Per nom. Missvain (talk) 19:20, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:08, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
No indoor COM:FoP（全景自由）in Mainland of China. WQL (talk) 13:18, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
Oppose subjects are simple stick-man diagrams, which a Chinese high court has ruled ineligible for copyright in a similar case. Read COM:TOO China for more.--Roy17 (talk) 15:37, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- If it is not Supreme High Court, then it will have no value for reference, since Chinese law is not case law.--WQL (talk) 16:25, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- Commons community makes decisions by drawing comparison between real-life cases and Commons files. Whether or not a country practises common law is not relevant to the discussion on copyright of an actual work.
- In this case, the figures are simple geometric shapes or doodles, or stick-man figures. They are similar to an example in COM:TOO China which decided a figure like 黑棍小人 (头部为黑色圆球体，没有面孔；身体的躯干、四肢和足部均由黑色线条构成；小人的头和身体呈分离状；小人的四肢呈拉长状) was ineligible for copyright.--Roy17 (talk) 16:38, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- You can make such a comparison, but as I said before, due to the fact that Chinese law is not case law, the example given is not ruling by Supreme High Court, and the case is not listed in the Typical Case published by Supreme High Court, your comparison is meaningless. --WQL (talk) 03:28, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
- If it is not Supreme High Court, then it will have no value for reference, since Chinese law is not case law.--WQL (talk) 16:25, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. David290 (talk) 05:10, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
Kept per discussion, especially per Roy. Taivo (talk) 18:50, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 沈澄心 as Dw no source since (dw no source since)
The previous DR was closed as kept because the figures on the image are considered below the relatively low TOO of the People's Republic of China. I don't see any new arguments for deletion here. 
Keep pandakekok9 05:22, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. (non-admin closure) --Mdaniels5757 (talk) 04:01, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
