PD-textlogo
edit
@Neutralhomer: is there any reason you think this is not a PD-textlogo per c:Commons:TOO? Masem, whom I consider very experienced in determining threshold of originality, thinks it is. I have already moved this to Commons. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:27, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
- @Finnusertop: Even if it is, shouldn't we leave the FURs just in case? That's the reason for my revert. Just to cover all bases. If Masem, who is far more knowledgeable with images than I am, says the FURs aren't necessary, then I will be glad to re-revert. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:19, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
- It's a good idea to remove the FURs. They aren't valid with the wrong copyright tag anyway. And they can be restored if the status of the image is reconsidered. Keeping them as a cautionary measure is just confusing. My understanding is that this was a fairly safe bet for a PD-text logo anyway. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:44, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
- Okie Dokie, that makes sense to me. I was just erring on the side of caution, but you are right, it does seem confusing. I would revert my revert but Magog the Ogre has already moved the image to Commons. My apologizes for the confusion. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 17:52, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
- It's a good idea to remove the FURs. They aren't valid with the wrong copyright tag anyway. And they can be restored if the status of the image is reconsidered. Keeping them as a cautionary measure is just confusing. My understanding is that this was a fairly safe bet for a PD-text logo anyway. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:44, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
