Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2022 February 14

< February 13	February 15 >

February 14[edit]

File:Battle of the Golds.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One of the source images (c:File:St. Sebastian's College, Moratuwa crest.jpg) was deleted as a non-trivial college logo in 2019, compromising the copyright status this image. ✗plicit 00:57, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Demultiplexer example.svg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, near duplicate of File:Demultiplexer Example01.svg, but not eligible for F8. Can't be exported to Commons because it contains "a non-standard DTD declaration". ✗plicit 01:30, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, redundant to Commons file. Salavat (talk) 14:42, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Bromo and Juliet 1926 movie poster.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, superseded by File:Bromo and Juliet poster.jpg hosted on Commons. ✗plicit 01:35, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, redundant to Commons file. Salavat (talk) 14:43, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:NicholasCooke.2.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, superseded by File:NicholasCooke.jpg hosted on Commons. ✗plicit 01:36, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, redundant to Commons file. Salavat (talk) 14:43, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:SQ-RBF graph no range.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support deletion - orphaned, and was created with WolframAlpha which claims copyright over anything it creates. From its terms of use, "The specific images, such as plots, typeset formulas, and tables, as well as the general page layouts, are all copyrighted by Wolfram|Alpha at the time Wolfram|Alpha generates them. A great deal of scholarship and innovation is included in the results generated and displayed by Wolfram|Alpha, including the presentations, collections, and juxtapositions of data, and the choices involved in formulating and composing mathematical results; these are also protected by copyright." House Blaster^talk 04:10, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:BoyNamedSueFilm.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image de-PRODded under assumption that screenshots are acceptable for use in Template:Infobox film. However, neither the template documentation nor WP:FILMNFI nor WP:FILMPOSTER mentions which screenshot that isn't a "title card" to use. Just now, I found its replacement, a cover art for the short film. As-is, the (supposed) screenshot (or press photo?) doesn't adequately help readers contextually understand the short film as a whole, especially without a film title as part of branding and marketing. George Ho (talk) 06:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Fig-trees-greyson-392.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image de-PRODded under assumption that screenshots are acceptable for use in Template:Infobox film. However, neither the template documentation nor WP:FILMNFI nor WP:FILMPOSTER mentions which screenshot that isn't a "title card" to use. I tried to find contextual marketing/brading images of the documentary Fig Trees, but neither a poster nor a cover art is found as of date. Furthermore, the same image is used in vtape.org and one CBC article. To me, the image itself appears random and depicts a scene of a man surrounded by a child with a string around the man's neck. However, I don't think it helps readers contextually identify and understand the whole operatic documentary film more about two activists who fight for access to treatment for HIV/AIDS. Furthermore, the whole article isn't about the scene itself, and I found no reliable sources describing the specific frame of the film. Also, I fail to understand how omitting the screenshot would affect the understanding of what is already conveyed in text. George Ho (talk) 08:05, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:WoubiCheri.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:WoubiCheri.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

Image de-PRODded under assumption that screenshots are acceptable for use in Template:Infobox film. However, neither the template documentation nor WP:FILMNFI nor WP:FILMPOSTER mentions which screenshot that isn't a "title card" to use. Fortunately, the film Woubi Chéri was released in Region 2 PAL DVD and streaming, indicating public release, years after release in film festivals. The DVD cover may be a derivative of the same image, but I think it helps readers contextually identify the film and convey the marketing and branding more than (this) stand-alone image could. George Ho (talk) 08:30, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Wazzou.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image de-PRODded under assumption that screenshots are acceptable for use in Template:Infobox film. However, neither the template documentation nor WP:FILMNFI nor WP:FILMPOSTER mentions which screenshot that isn't a "title card" to use. Speaking of that, I was able to capture and then upload the title card of the film le Wazzou polygame. Both screenshots depict just African men conversating, but this one I'm listing here lacks an opening title that the other screenshot has. Also, it lacks any other elements included in a poster. George Ho (talk) 09:11, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Un chant d amour.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded one of DVD covers of the short film Un chant d'amour intentionally to replace as the lead image the screenshot of a young man inhaling smoke from a straw, which I pushed down into the body article. Honestly, I think the scene can be easily conveyed in text and is not that hard to describe in text. Furthermore, the screenshot identifies itself as one tiny portion of the film, but it doesn't help readers contextually convey and understand the film as a whole. I'm using an image representing the film's one of legitimate and authorised public releases after its long years of censorship. (Alternatively, I could've used a VHS release that collects three short films, including Un chant d'amour. As I figured, a stand-alone release would represent the film more contextually than the VHS one.) George Ho (talk) 10:52, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Prince Royce - Stand By Me.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: no consensus. ✗plicit 13:21, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the uploader's willingness to display the front cover of the Prince Royce version, which was successful in selected US charts... well, just the US, not overseas, unfortunately. I'm unsure whether it helps readers contextually understand and convey the song that has been notoriously sung by originally Ben E. King and then John Lennon. Also, many other singers have performed the song. Well, I just now separated the Prince Royce version into its own section. Still, as I have assumed, the omission of the cover art hadn't affect the understanding of the song when the JPEG file was deleted after the PROD tag was uncontested for a week. Is the song's nationwide success harder to convey in text without the cover art? (Three years ago, the song article was less developed and looked awkward especially with bunch of infoboxes using their respective cover arts, including this one in JPEG.) George Ho (talk) 04:07, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is a song cover of a notable cover version that if they were the original song would pass WP:GNG and WP:SONGS, thus it an acceptable fair use and passes WP:NFCC#8. Aspects (talk) 01:44, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:59, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Sarwar hrss Oct2016.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The pictures in the presentation likely aren't de minimis. Image is not used anywhere. Ixfd64 (talk) 18:16, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 14:49, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Without-the-Communist-Party-there-would-be-no-New-China-excerpt.wav[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: relisted on 2022 February 22. ✗plicit 13:22, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Without-the-Communist-Party-there-would-be-no-New-China-excerpt.wav (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

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

File:Halloween Ends poster.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as G7 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a fanmade poster and is not official. As such, this should be quickly deleted since we do not use posters that are not officially made by the studios themselves. MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 20:13, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I did not know it was fan-made. I am sorry for this mixup and fully support a speedy deletion of this file. Cardei012597 (talk) 23:41, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Europe - Always The Pretenders.ogg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Portion of Always the Pretenders heard in sample not proven contextually significant to Europe (band) and Always the Pretenders as wholes. Possibly easily conveyed in text. George Ho (talk) 22:40, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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