Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 November 11

< November 10	November 12 >

November 11

File:Madame X Deluxe.jpg

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 ⚡ 02:01, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Album covers fails per WP:NFCC#3a and #8. Inclusion of the deluxe cover was also previously discussed and decided against back in September 2019 on the talk page of Madame X (album). livelikemusic (TALK!) 03:21, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Livelikemusic: In my opinion, the Deluxe cover could be added as an alternate cover as it is significantly different from the original, and is the main album artwork used on all digital platforms. Other articles for studio albums such as Folklore (Taylor Swift album) and Good Girl Gone Bad also add in alternate covers. I have added this into the article talk page. The k nine 2 (talk) 07:41, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) @Livelikemusic: It's not really good practice to start a discussion about a particular non-free file here at FFD and then literally a minute later remove the file you're asking for opinions about from the only article where it was being used. FFD discussions are expected to run for at least seven days, but orphaned non-free content can be deleted per WP:F5 after five days. The point in discussing things here at FFD is to seek consensus about a file's non-free use because there appears to be disagreement over it; in other words, it's deletion or removal is likely going to be considered contentious by some. What you've done (even if it was unintentional) is to kind of subvert that process and try to have the file de facto deleted by orphaning it. If you thought the file's non-free use was clearly non-policy compliant, then there were other ways (e.g. WP:PROD or {{Di-disputed fair use rationale}}) to go about tagging it for deletion; however, once you started a discussion about a file here at FFD, you should've been willing to let the discussion run it's course and see what the consensus turns out to be. If the consensus supports your arguments, then the file will be removed/deleted; if, however, it doesn't, the file may need to be restored if mistakenly deleted as orphaned non-free content before this discussion is resolved. Another thing is that you didn't notify the uploader of the file of this discussion, which is something again that might be mistaken for being done in bad faith. The uploader will likely receive a notification of the file being orphaned non-free use, but you should've notified them of this discussion as well per item #3 of the "Instructions for listing files for discussion" listed on the main WP:FFD page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:08, 11 November 2020 (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:Elbegdorj.JPG

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 ⚡ 02:01, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free image being used in Tsakhiagiin Elbegdorj#Leading Democratic movement which I feel fails both WP:NFCC#1 (WP:FREER) and WP:NFCC#8 (WP:NFC#CS) and also possibly WP:NFCC#10a.

Elbegdorj is still living and is a former President of Mongolia and Prime Minister of Mongolia. There is a freely licensed photo of him (File:Tsakhiagiin Elbegdorj 2016.jpg) currently being used in the main infobox for primary identification purposes which means that a non-free one is not needed per FREER for that reason. In fact, there are a number of photos of Elbegdorj available on Commons at c:Category:Tsakhiagiin Elbegdorj which pretty much makes any non-free photo of him used simply for identification purposes unacceptable per FREER. The question then is whether this meets NFCC#8.

I don't think it does given the content of "Leading Democratic movement" section. There's a lot in that section about the role Elbegdorj played during that period of time, but there's nothing really specific about this particular image. The rationale provided for the file's use seems to be exactly the type of thing that WP:ITSHISTORIC refers to when it states, "It is also important to distinguish between an image that is, itself, historic and notable in its own right (such as the photograph Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima), and thus is very likely to satisfy criterion 8, and a non-notable image that illustrates an historic event, in which case passage of criterion 8 is a matter of editorial judgment and consensus." So, while the movement and associated demonstrations (including Elbegdorj's speech) seem certainly historic, I don't think this particular photograph meets that definition and omitting it from the section isn't really goign to be detrimental to the reader's understanding of the article in that section.

In addition, there's no source information provided for the photo; so, even though it appears to be of the event described in the article, there's no way to tell for sure. The photo also looks like it even was signed which makes the en:provence even a little more unclear which makes NFCC#10a an issue.

This file was tagged for speedy deletion back in June 2007, which was declined by an adminstrator (Quadell) who posted his reasons for doing so at File talk:Elbegdorj.JPG. Back in 2007 when WP:NFCC was just in its early stages perhaps this seemed like a valid justification for non-free use, but I don't think the same can be said now after the NFCC has been expanded upon a refined over the years. Quadell hasn't edited since May of this year and the uploader hasn't edited since 2006; so, even though they've been notified as a courtesy, I'm also going to add please see notifications, to the WikiProjects listed on the article's talk page as well as to WP:MCQ and WT:NFCC to try and get more editors involved in this discussion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:34, 11 November 2020 (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:Cher-Believe (music video).png

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 ⚡ 02:01, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A screenshot (File:Cher in believe.jpg) was deleted back in 2009, i.e. eleven years ago, for not meeting NFCC. I'm nominating a newly uploaded screenshot rather than PROD or any other speedy deletion tag. I searched for reliable sources substantially covering the music video of Believe (Cher song), but I fell short instead as of date. If other reliable sources covering the music video exist, I bet they would briefly mention the depicted image of the singer with some hairstyle in the music video. Either way, I think the image would fail WP:NFCC#8. George Ho (talk) 12:15, 11 November 2020 (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:Carabao Sculpture (Rizal Park, Roxas Blvd., Ermita, Manila; 2015-06-12).jpg

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 ⚡ 05:03, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No freedom of panorama in the phils. Artist is Jose Mendoza according to https://www.philstar.com/lifestyle/arts-and-culture/2001/12/17/143965/jose-mendoza-sculptor-all-seasons/amp/ - who seems to be alive during 70s and 80s Mrcl lxmna (talk) 14:36, 11 November 2020 (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.

Files from Mithla777

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 -FASTILY 00:25, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Claimed to be own work but th uploader's history of copyright violations makes these claimes dubious. Other images that were deleted have made the claim that the uploader was at the airport and took the photos, but the images turn out to have been copied from the official twitter feed of the airport. -- Whpq (talk) 15:38, 11 November 2020 (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.