File:MatamataCows.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Lt ( | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Uploaded by a user later blocked for spamming. Cannot find an original but the terrible quality suggests this is a crop/screenshot of someone else's work. Traumnovelle (talk) 02:53, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:RuskinHeightsDamage.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Wildfireupdateman ( | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Photograph is credited to the Kansas City Star [1] and therefore not a work of the National Weather Service. However, there's a chance it may be in the public domain as several other photographs from the set did not carry the required copyright notice. Ixfd64 (talk) 04:55, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Rlandmann in case she's able to provide more information. Ixfd64 (talk) 04:58, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was a bit iffy about this one. PD-NWS is kinda in a weird spot right now, I'm personally a bit confused. I notice that another PDNWS image is also being discussed here (Oelwein). Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 05:03, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• This one's tricky. The attribution only tells us that the NWS got the photo from The Kansas City Star but lacks the specifics we need to make a copyright determination. I've browsed and searched the paper for a few weeks after the tornado (until coverage peters out in June), but have not spotted this photo in the coverage of the time. It's also possible that this photo originates in the KCS archives but was published elsewhere.

The Kansas City Star was published with copyright notices in this period, but for those to be valid now, the copyrights would have had to be renewed around 1985, and I can find no such record.

So... either way, we need to know when and where this was published, or it's presumably unfree.

I think we should delete until and unless some evidence emerges of these publication details. --Rlandmann (talk) 11:16, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can I just reupload it as an NFF later? I want at least one damage picture in the tornado article. Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 23:52, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:F3+ damage in Oelwein after the tornado (1968).png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by EF5 ( | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Photograph is from the Oelwein Daily Register and therefore not a work of the National Weather Service. It may or may not be in the public domain for other reasons, but this requires evidence. Ixfd64 (talk) 05:00, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Rlandmann in case she has more information about this photo. Ixfd64 (talk) 05:02, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks -- this one is "PD-no notice" and should be transferred to the Commons. --Rlandmann (talk) 10:37, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Funky Cold Medina sample.ogg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by TonyTheTiger ( | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

De-PRODding without rationale still didn't address my concerns about the file's contextual significance to a whole rap song. Well, an authorized, licensed upload of the music video isn't on YouTube yet (not counting unauthorized uploads). Still, despite music and lyrics heard, this short clip doesn't IMO improve understanding of what's already understood when/by reading the whole article. Furthermore, replacing it with any other clip of the same rap song still wouldn't improve much either. Moreover, even omitting this clip wouldn't affect such understanding as implicitly claimed by someone who challenged the PROD tag. George Ho (talk) 20:55, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Funky Cold Medina.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Same As It Ever Was ( | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

The whole cover art is less than remarkable in terms of originality, which is required by the US copyright law (c:COM:TOO US). It contains just black background, simple lines using a plain color (gold- or yellow-ish?), artist name, and song title. Well, the song title is used twice: one is forward-facing; other is reflected like a mirror, i.e. upside down and reversed. That still doesn't make the cover art eligible for US copyright. Furthermore, the US single release uses this cover art (45cat). This image should be transferred to Commons, and prior revisions of the file should be undeleted. George Ho (talk) 21:03, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]