Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2025 July 14

July 14

File:Order of the National Security Merit, Hangul- 보국훈장, the Person of National Merit Medal.webp

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: delete. Namuwiki is user-generated, and the KOGL license can not be verified outside of that. ✗plicit 13:33, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Order of the National Security Merit, Hangul- 보국훈장, the Person of National Merit Medal.webp (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Mmichelyn (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Image is from Namuwiki, which does not have appropriate copyright license for use here grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 01:23, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Namuwiki doesn't use a compatible license, but from what I can tell, this image is listed there as being {{KOGL}}, which would be compatible. Based on that I'd say we should keep and relicense, unless you think the license there is incorrect. hinnk (talk) 02:59, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relicense to non-free whilst the photo might be public ___domain, the medal itself is a work that has not been freely licenced. South Korean government works aren't public ___domain by default. —Matrix(!) _{ping one}^{when replying} {u - t? - _uselessc} 06:33, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone feel like writing a fair use rationale? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:22, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Pppery: for what? there's no article this is used in. —Matrix _{ping me}^{when u reply} (t? - c) 18:41, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You said "Relicense to non-free". That implies the creation of a fair use rationale; otherwise it would just be a "delete". * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:43, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Pppery: mb I didn't realise. Meant delete. —Matrix _{ping me}^{when u reply} (t? - c) 21:23, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The link provided by hinnk is dead -- do we have any reason to believe that the photo itself is PD? As Pppery notes, non-free images can only be kept if used in articles and accompanied by an FUR, so given that the image currently isn't used, we can't keep it if non-free -- in the circumstances, arguing that it's not free is arguing for deletion. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 10:18, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The URL still works for me. What is it you're seeing? hinnk (talk) 10:20, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.