Commons:Deletion requests/File:BlackJack2.jpg

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:BlackJack2.jpg

Looks like scans of paper cards, so unlikely made by the uploader. Stefan4 (talk) 09:30, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, is there a problem with scanning playing cards? playing cards are public domain. BuickCenturyDriver (talk) 10:08, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You may not upload scans of copyrighted playing cards without permission from the one who drew the illustrations on the cards. --Stefan4 (talk) 10:46, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are these two images:

They have been on this site for at least two years, so there certainly is no reason to take down my card image. BuickCenturyDriver (talk) 10:47, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Now tagged {{subst:dw-nsd}} since the uploaders didn't provide any source information for the underlying cards. Without source information, it is not possible to determine whether they are old enough to be in the public domain. --Stefan4 (talk) 10:51, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are some playing card designs which are so ubiquitous that it would be impossible to determine if there even is a copyright holder on them; the designs that Bicycle cards use, for instance, has turned up in hundreds of different manufacturers' cards, and who knows whether USPC/Bicycle was the first to use them, and who even holds the copyright.

That aside, I am pretty sure that the cards pictured here are from the game show Card Sharks. That ace of spades looks like the one from Card Sharks. —Scott5114 ↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] (who seems to know more about playing cards than any one person really should), 07:43, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1.Add just above the section head with the file in it.

Discussion has not been edited for over 2 weeks, no consensus to delete. BuickCenturyDriver (talk) 04:39, 24 February 2013 (UTC)|, Discussion has not been edited for over 2 weeks, no consensus to delete. BuickCenturyDriver (talk) 04:39, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reopening because of improper closure by the uploader. The uploader hasn't addressed any of the concerns in the nomination and the only reason for closing the nomination seems to be that it hasn't been edited for some time, so the original issues still remain. The uploader needs to show that the cards are in the public domain. Otherwise, the file has to be deleted. Stefan4 (talk) 10:17, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted

First, it is completely inappropriate for the uploader to close a discussion of deletion of his own work. A DR should never be closed by an interested party, except that the nom may withdraw it.
Second, if you're going to close DRs, please do it correctly. The tags {{Udelh}} and {{Udelf}} are for undeletions.
As for the issue at hand, decks of cards are copyrighted. In particular, the design of this ace of spades is sufficiently different to pass the TOO. Also, this image is small and very poor quality, so even if copyright were not an issue, I might delete it on those grounds.
. Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:56, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, sorry, I was the one who messed up the templates. User:BuickCenturyDriver used {{subst:delh}} and {{subst:delf}}, and I accidentally used the wrong templates when unsubstituting them. --Stefan4 (talk) 14:02, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No matter -- we all make mistakes. It took me a second try to get the {{Delf}} on this one.. Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:32, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]