Commons:Deletion requests/File:FlaggedRevs-2-1.svg
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.
This is too similar to the CBS logo. Many editors have complained, especially on en.wikipedia. Should error on the side of caution and prevent any possible copyright infringment William S. Saturn (talk) 23:33, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- Speedy Delete: Way too similar to the CBS logo. Too many complaints on en.Wiki. Do away with them and find something new. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 23:50, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Keep, ineligible for copyright. A deletion request on this public domain file is not the appropriate platform to have the Flagged Revisions icon changed. --Martin H. (talk) 00:03, 20 June 2010 (UTC)- Keep, PD-ineligible. VernoWhitney (talk) 00:09, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
- SPEEDY KEEP This image and the group it is part of were created and at their source are owned by the WikiMedia Foundation. This nomination and the speedy delete noms of all of the related images is a joke. It is included in the mw:Extension:FlaggedRevs so protecting the WMF from harm is kind of a lulzy reason when they still put the image out with every download of the extension. Url for the image in the extension: http://svn.wikimedia.org/viewvc/mediawiki/trunk/extensions/FlaggedRevs/img/2.png?pathrev=63265&view=co&revision=45289 Do we really need to be protecting the WikiMedia Foundation from themselves? :P Keep all related images. delirious & lost ☯ ~hugs~ 00:10, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep The level of copyright paranoia here is ridiculous, or else it's an excuse to delete the image because some people just don't like it. Both this and the CBS logo are probably {{PD-ineligible}}, as they are both stylized images of a human eye made from a circle containing a vesica piscis containing another circle. Besides the CBS logo, it's also very similar to the Eye of Providence, the khamsa. But neither of those would support an attempt to delete this image. Anomie (talk) 00:17, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
- "Probably" isn't good enough. --William S. Saturn (talk) 00:43, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
- Are you a copyright lawyer, that you can make definite statements? I'm not, and copyright law seems far from logical, hence "probably". Anomie (talk) 01:21, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
- If you are willing to "speedy" anything, you ought to be more sure than "probably". I am not arguing with you, you are "probably" right, but we must error on the side of caution in legal manners, even if we are "probably" in line.--William S. Saturn (talk) 02:19, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
- I also "probably" won't be hit by lightning tomorrow. My lack of certainty isn't going to cause me a moment's worry. Anomie (talk) 03:19, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
- When it comes to the law, you must always be certain.--William S. Saturn (talk) 05:11, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
- To be honest when it comes to trademark law certainty is purposely not always there (to avoid someone from claiming total rights to use something simple) but this specific case is quite clear (almost as close to certain as you can get in this area of law. The copyright part is certain but I think you have been focusing on the trademark part. Jamesofur (talk) 05:26, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
- I also "probably" won't be hit by lightning tomorrow. My lack of certainty isn't going to cause me a moment's worry. Anomie (talk) 03:19, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
- If you are willing to "speedy" anything, you ought to be more sure than "probably". I am not arguing with you, you are "probably" right, but we must error on the side of caution in legal manners, even if we are "probably" in line.--William S. Saturn (talk) 02:19, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
- Are you a copyright lawyer, that you can make definite statements? I'm not, and copyright law seems far from logical, hence "probably". Anomie (talk) 01:21, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
- "Probably" isn't good enough. --William S. Saturn (talk) 00:43, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
- Keep In no way a copyvio or a trademark vio. Many of the arguments against show no understanding of the trademark regulations. We do not delete based on wrong understandings of the law. Jamesofur (talk) 01:30, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
