Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2019 August 25

< August 24	August 26 >

August 25[edit]

File:Why Women Kill, season 1 socialites.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. The keep !votes do not address the WP:NFCC#8 concern and/or are otherwise misinterpretations of said policy. -FASTILY 06:17, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NFCC#8. The image is not the subject of sourced critical commentary; it is used without any commentary in the cast section. The characters' appearance is not discussed in the the article. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:38, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Criterion 8 does not talk about the photo showing or not showing something discussed in the article. It's specifically says Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This file does increase the readers' understanding of the topic because it helps the reader figure out who is who as it is not very clear on the show. It also gives the reader the ability to see the differences in the ways women dress in different centuries, a central point in the plot of the show. Any description of the main character's appearance would be less useful than an actual picture of all three women. Jayab314 09:58, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
it helps the reader figure out who is who [... and ...] see the differences in the ways women dress in different centuries Both can be accomplished with free prose/media. (WP:NFCC#1) — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:06, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the photo is simply bring used as a cast photo. There is no significant sourced description of the characters that would justify the use of this image. In particular, the above keep argument about the different modes of dress being key to the plot is not mentioned in the article at all. It is not sufficient assert that contextual is met, it must be proven. Fails WP:NFCC#8. -- Whpq (talk) 11:54, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Whpq: I added a paragraph that states from two different new websites that the show focuses more on the aesthetics of the different centuries than other things. This paragraph/section will be expanded upon once more reviews from different websites/magazines come out as the series progresses. Jayab314 13:18, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That has been removed from the section and didn't discuss the characters' appearances, specifically, only the show in general. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:06, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I had a look at that paragraph. It in no ways supports your assertion. Furthermore, non-free content requires that the supporting commentary currently exist to support and not some presumed future content yet tobe published. -- Whpq (talk) 13:42, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - It provides a physical reference for the main characters being described in the section. Bluerules (talk) 18:24, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The characters are not described in any meaningful way the section. There is only a fragment for each, which doesn't mention their appearance. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:06, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: As it contains a pic of the main characters, I think it does give the readers a better understanding of the TV series. — YoungForever^(talk) 19:33, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
How so? As a reader (and someone who has never seen the show), I can understand what the article is about without seeing the image. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:06, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@JJMC89: Since the storyline is somewhat confusing on how the episodes keep switching between time periods, a picture of the three main characters, one from each time period, helps the reader understand which character goes with which time period. Jayab314 01:11, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If the show is confusing, this image does nothing to fix that. As well, that reasoning fails to address WP:NFCC#8 which is the reason this image is listed her. -- Whpq (talk) 13:42, 29 August 2019 (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:QWOP.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:11, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:QWOP.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

Free alternative is available for illustrative purposes, see https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:QWOP_screenshot.jpg. The non-free use rationale does not explain why non-free text is important. ParticipantOfTheEncyclopedia (talk) 15:12, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. The text part is not needed to illustrate the article, and may be hardly readable either for some users at the current resolution. De728631 (talk) 17:26, 25 August 2019 (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:Inter Milan.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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:11, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Another SVG version is now available at Commons as File:FC Internazionale Milano 2014.svg. Since a fair use rationale is not needed any longer, and I don't see any point in transferring this smaller version to Commons, I suggest deletion of the file at Wikipedia. De728631 (talk) 17:21, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:45, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Giant Snowman 18:47, 26 August 2019 (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.