Commons:Deletion requests/File:Pepsi Logo.jpg

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.

File:Pepsi Logo.jpg

[edit]

Image is used only for vandalism and has no Encyclopedic value at all. The uploader is indef blocked at enwiki as a vandalism only account. See also: this edit in which the uploader vandalized the pepsi article with this image. ~ Barts1a | Talk to me | Yell at me 03:04, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Only uploaded for vandalism purposes", that's a valid argument. Adding a speedy tag calling the file itself "vandalism" and "attack on Pepsi Co" are not. Fry1989 eh? 03:07, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Commons files get removed when they're wrong, even if they've slipped under the radar for years. That logo should be deleted too. The "threshold of originality" is really meant to cover typeface, not straight-up copyright subversion. In due time. Doc9871 (talk) 03:34, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The status of that file was already questioned and it was kept by an Admin. Again, do just the most basic of research before you say things. It's called being proactive. I also look things up first, so if somebody says something, I can either say "no, that's not true" and direct them with a link, or when they are right, I can save myself some face and base my opinion on that new information at the same time. Fry1989 eh? 03:37, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't need your advice: I do just fine around here on my own. Duly noted. Doc9871 (talk) 03:40, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Commenting here feels like I'm being forced to feed the troll who uploaded this, but I've seen it thru this far, so... delete because it was being used only for vandalism on en.wiki. I also agree with Doc and Dr.K above, but won't bother to use this as a rationale if Commons really isn't interested in that aspect. --Floquenbeam (talk) 03:38, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]


  •  Comment Floquenbeam (who accused me of wanting to keep anything related to a penis, despite the fact I've voted "delete" on plenty of penis pics in my time here) and Dr.K (who accused me of being clueless, when he was actually clueless about the copyright status) should note that I haven't voted. That's because I don't care if it goes or stays. What I care about is a file (any file) being deleted for the wrong reasons. Adding a speedy of it claiming it was a copyvio, when the Pepsi logo is on here as PD, is a wrong reason. Adding a speedy saying it's an attack on Pepsi's image, when again their logo is on here and deemed PD, is also a wrong reason. Saying that it was uploaded only for the purpose of vandalism however, is a valid argument, and what I was waiting for. Fry1989 eh? 03:45, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please spare me your presumption that I was clueless about the copyright status. In Wikipedia there is such thing as {{db-attack}}. I assumed that this being an attack page would qualify for speedy regardless of its copyright status. So I did not use the copyright status as a basis for my arguments. If you don't have the {{db-attack}} criterion at Commons, too bad. Dr.K. (talk) 03:57, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually you did. "Most probably a copyvio of the Pepsi logo " (sic). Fry1989 eh? 04:00, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Why did you cut off my edit summary in half? Here is the complete edit summary: Most probably a copyvio of the Pepsi logo and an attack page on Pepsi corp So I did use the qualifier "most probably" meaning I was not completely sure about the copyright status but I also based my CSD argument on the attack criterion. Dr.K. (talk) 04:06, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I omitted half your statement because the other half wasn't in regards to copyright. But the first part was, so to say you didn'tuse copyright as an argument is a lie. Isn't it delightful how everything you say here is recorded? Fry1989 eh? 04:10, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You are distorting reality. On this page I did not use the copyright status as an argument at all. So on this page I did not lie when I said that I did not use the copyright as the basis of my argument. I just based my argument solely on the attack argument, see my comment above: It is an attack page on Pepsi Co's image and as such it should be speedily deleted This means that I abandoned the copyright angle on this deletion discussion. So stop your abuse. Dr.K. (talk) 04:15, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say "on this page". I said you used it as an arguement and why I had to revert you because it was a faulty argument. Then you lied and said you never mentioned copyright in the first place. Jolly good fun when people contradict themselves. Oh, and "my abuse"? You're the one who called me clueless, which I'm not, as so far I know more about this matter than anyone else on the page. Fry1989 eh? 04:19, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You are an incivil abuser. Claiming that I should have included the edit summaries as part of my arguments on this page lacks good faith and shows your character. I will not engage you further in this mud-slinging. I will have nothing further to do with people of your ilk. You also distort the facts as usual. I never called you clueless personally. I called your message clueless: Rv clueless message after you left it on my talk page to threaten me with reporting me for disruption for trying to speedy this vandalistic image, which I still find it to be a ridiculous and clueless message. But I never called you clueless personally, just your message. So stop lying. Dr.K. (talk) 06:32, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Why are you making a big deal out of this when you, yourself, deleted one of the three images that "Stupidhead69" (great name...) uploaded? It's a shitty, vandalistic piece of crap. So just delete it and stop making a Federal case over it. Yeesh... Doc9871 (talk) 04:21, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm making a federal case out of this because I have one person here who called me clueless when I'm anything but on this matter, and another who accused me of wanting to keep anything relating to a penis, when I've not only voted "delete" on many penis pics here, I've even nominated a few myself. Fry1989 eh? 04:26, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know anything about that. This is a "case-by-case" scenario, and animosity should be left at the door when possible. In this case, the image needs to go; whatever attacks, real or perceived, that have been levied between editors mean nothing compared to the issue at hand. Doc9871 (talk) 04:29, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Blatant Vandalism. Why are we even having this discusison? FASTILY (TALK) 07:21, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Pepsi_Logo.jpg&oldid=69091382"