Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2015 July 17

< July 16	July 18 >

July 17[edit]

File:Lion-logo.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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned free image; File:UNA Lions logo.png has replaced this file in all articles. Corkythehornetfan 02:18, 17 July 2015 (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:MenbalckTITLEcolor.JPEG[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 Czar (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:12, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The screenshot is used in the plot section of Men in Black (1934 film) against WP:FILMNFI in that the plot section describes the film and is not critical commentary of the image itself. Since the fair use rationale states the screenshot is being used "to illustrate film being described", the article already has the film poster for this purpose, thus the screenshot is replaceable and fails WP:NFCC#3a. There is no critical commentary of the image itself in the article, it does nothing to increase the reader's understanding of the film and its exclusion is not detrimental to the understanding of the film, thereby failing WP:NFCC#8. Aspects (talk) 03:56, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Delete image.

Support - Useless. -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 19:27, 18 July 2015 (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:Meninblakc color.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:07, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The screenshot is used in the Production and significance section of Men in Black (1934 film). Since the fair use rationale states the screenshot is being used "to illustrate film being described", the article already has the film poster for this purpose, thus the screenshot is replaceable and fails WP:NFCC#3a. There is no critical commentary of the image itself in the article, it does nothing to increase the reader's understanding of the film and its exclusion is not detrimental to the understanding of the film, thereby failing WP:NFCC#8. Aspects (talk) 04:03, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Film poster does not qualify as illustrating film being described but rather the tools originally used to advertise the film. Photo within article illustrates pivotal movement in film. Do not delete.Oanabay04 (talk) 15:08, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The film poster definitely illustrates the film, especially since it uses a screenshot where the Stooges are dressed up as doctors. The screenshot fails WP:FILMNFI because there needs to be critical commentary from reliable sources and since there is none, it is being used to decorate the article. If the screenshot shows a "pivotal movement in the film," then the movement would already be described in the article. You failed to address how this screenshot passes WP:NFCC#8: The fair use rationale having a generic "to illustrate film being described" as the purpose of the screenshot, shows that the screenshot is being used simply to decorate the article, adds nothing to the understanding of the film and its removal would not be detrimental to the understanding of the film. Aspects (talk) 21:35, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Per Oanabay04. -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 19:27, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: the film scene is not discussed in the article, and inclusion of the image does not increase our understanding of the topic of the article. It appears to have been added purely for decoration. Fails NFCC #8. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:54, 3 August 2015 (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:Shaun Wallace.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: keep. Nominator has not provided a reason for deletion and over a month has elapsed on this nomination. Non-admin closure. Safiel (talk) 15:36, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

CB2288 (talk) 07:33, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @CB2288:, why did you nominate this file? Thanks Deadstar (talk) 13:48, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader was never notified. Tagged for no source or license. – czar 18:38, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It was user:CB2288 who stripped the source and license info from the file, with this edit. He also nominated the file for deletion in May 2015, at which time I searched online for copies of this image and found none. To date CB2288 has given no reason why he believes this file should be deleted, and the original uploader asserts it's his/her own work. I see no reason to delete the file. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:47, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Until such time that the nominator comes up with a reason for deletion. Aspects (talk) 03:37, 5 August 2015 (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:Chain reaction new host 2015.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 Czar (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:12, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No license info. Dismas|^(talk) 23:20, 17 July 2015 (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.