Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 June 5

< June 4	June 6 >

June 5[edit]

File:Dionne Warwick – A House Is Not a Home (song).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 prejudice to replacement, keep until then czar 20:41, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This image is the front cover of the French EP. The song itself was the B-side of "You'll Never Get to Heaven (If You Break My Heart)". This image was misused as supposedly the picture sleeve of the single release, but it is not. It should be either replaced by a side label or be deleted. George Ho (talk) 00:52, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I encourage you to "Be Bold" and upload the side label, replace this image in the article, and tag this image as {{orfud}}. That seems simpler than trying to get consensus at FFD. ★ Bigr Tex 18:32, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@George Ho, feel free to replace the image yourself. I'm leaving the EP image up for identification until someone changes it boldly. In general, you don't need to take these kinds of replacements to discussion unless you have reason to think they'll be contentious or in need of external feedback czar 20:41, 24 July 2016 (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:TheCloserIGettoYou Luther+Beyonce.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 czar 20:43, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As long as the 1978 Roberta Flack and Donny Hathaway recording is the article's main subject, and the 2003 Luther Vandross/Beyoncé recording is the subtopic of the article, a non-free image is no longer needed or necessary. Per Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 April 29#File:Madonna - I Want You.JPG, the promo image fails to meet NFCC. It lacked commercial release; the Vandross/Beyoncé recording was limited to promotional use, i.e. released to only radio stations or DJs. Also, even when this image is removed, the readers can still understand the recordings by reading the sourced content. George Ho (talk) 07:28, 5 June 2016 (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:Donny-Hathaway-Roberta-Flack.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 BigrTex (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:10, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This image is used in two articles, but there are already biographical images of each person. How valid is a use in each article? George Ho (talk) 07:40, 5 June 2016 (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:Snow Farm American Chardonnay.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 czar 20:20, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Photo may be free, but subject appears to be packaging artwork, image is in use, so fair-use claim potential. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:16, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree about fair-use claim, since photo appears to be the work of the uploader and thus likely fails WP:NFCCP#4 (Previous Publication). ★ Bigr Tex 18:34, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Surely packaging labels without fair use concerns exist. I can restore this image if you want to edit out the copyrighted features yourself, but otherwise not sure how this even fits or necessitates a fair use version czar 20:20, 24 July 2016 (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:Religious-map-of-Bosnia-Herzegovina.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 BigrTex (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:10, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Vuage sourcing, unused, A possible inaccuray is noted in the file description. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:16, 5 June 2016 (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:Stefan Kotromanić-1333.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: insufficient source information czar 21:07, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

the text itself would be old (1333), but there's no information on the transcriptions publication. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:17, 5 June 2016 (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:SS Yongala Deck Light.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:04, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't PD, at best it's copyrighted free use, per the permission slip inlined.. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:34, 5 June 2016 (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:Mickey mouse acid warning.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: restore as fair use czar 20:58, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ihcoyc originally claimed this as public domain because it was an "anonymous folk artifact"; User:AKMask later changed this to {{PD-Pre1978}}, but there is no evidence that this particular flyer was created before 1978. (The 2003 book given as a source for the image doesn't give a date, but mentions the urban legend existing into the 1980s.) McGeddon (talk) 16:19, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. At one point, I added a fair use tag to the picture, which was subsequently removed. It is, as noted, an anonymous folk artifact, and as for actual fair use, the fact that it was made for anonymous circulation ought to remove any reasonable objection to its existence as a fair use image. Also note that the image was kept after a 2011 discussion here. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 03:06, 13 June 2016 (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:Baby caillou.gif[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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:04, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The image is used in the production section of Caillou. There are already two cast images in the article that both have the four-year-old main character in them. To have another picture showing the character less then four years previous when they look relatively the same fails WP:NFCC#3a. There is no critical commentary of the image in this section and no description of Calliou has a baby in the article besides the image caption of "Caillou when he was a baby.", it does nothing to increase the reader's understanding of the film and its exclusion is not detrimental to the understanding of the television show, thereby failing WP:NFCC#8. Aspects (talk) 17:55, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I will grant that the image may be better placed elsewhere in the article (perhaps with some shuffling around of text as well), but as it stands it is directly beside a sentence stating when the original books were first published. As such, and because the character's appearance is significantly different from that in the show, this image increases reader understanding of the topic in a way that words alone could not. Mdrnpndr (talk) 18:00, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The image being next to a sentence about the publishing history is not the critical commentary necessary for this image to be used in this article especially since the Calliou as a baby looks the same as Calliou as a toddler and is clearly not "significantly different" as you claimed. Aspects (talk) 03:49, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article provides no reason why having an image of the character as a baby is necessary, regardless of placement in the article. The show is apparently about a 4-year old, and there are multiple pictures of the character at that age. I agree that it violates WP:NFCCP#8. ★ Bigr Tex 16:32, 26 June 2016 (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:Malaika Vaz Greenland.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:04, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A number of the flikr uploaders images seem to have stock photo watermarking on them, Are we sure about the status of this image? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:19, 5 June 2016 (UTC) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:19, 5 June 2016 (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:Malaika Vaz.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:04, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Flikr uploader has many images with a "stock photo" watermark, Can we be sure about the status of this image? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:22, 5 June 2016 (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:Kaderschoice.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: now on Commons czar 20:36, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused personal photo. Cloudbound (talk) 19:47, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note, it appears to be a photo of Kader Abdolah, as noted in the description. ★ Bigr Tex 16:42, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Commons Seems like BigrTex's identification is correct considering other images of this fellow. Not seeing any reason to believe copyvio (EXIF is plausible and no prior publication), and commons:Category:Kader Abdolah has similar images.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:26, 7 July 2016 (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:Kadlec.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 BigrTex (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:10, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused low resolution photo. Cloudbound (talk) 19:48, 5 June 2016 (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:Kadom Rasul.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 BigrTex (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:10, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused low resolution photo. Cloudbound (talk) 19:50, 5 June 2016 (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:Foot of Rasul.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 BigrTex (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:10, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused low resolution photo. Cloudbound (talk) 19:52, 5 June 2016 (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:Kansas University (logo).gif[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 BigrTex (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:10, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused logo. Cloudbound (talk) 20:57, 5 June 2016 (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:Katana Veloso 2007.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 BigrTex (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:10, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused personal photo. Cloudbound (talk) 21:00, 5 June 2016 (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.