Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2019 April 9

< April 8	April 10 >

April 9

File:Directed by The Wachowskis Sense8.png

This is an invalid piece of non-free media: it doesn't depict the article subject. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:50, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I thought The Wachowskis could be considered not just two people but also a kind of brand, and that a directorial credit could be considered a representative image of that brand. But I don't feel strongly about this and I knew it was a slightly unusual use of non-free media. WanderingWanda (they/them) (t/c) 01:27, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no WP:NFCC justification.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:22, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the subject are two people and could be replaced by an image of the two individualsWP:NFCC#1, and there is no content in the article support the uploader's contention the two are a brand, so the usage also fails WP:NFCC#8. -- Whpq (talk) 19:33, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Russian Doll promo poster.png

Textbook failure of Wikipedia:Non-free content#cite note-3. Not a word of critical sourced commentary on the cover art and logo already serves the purpose of identification at the top of the article. Also not necessary for visual identification. Sebastian James (talk) 21:02, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: there may need to be a broader conversation about whether TV articles should use logos or posters as lead images (the MoS currently recommends posters but it feels like logos have become more popular.) WanderingWanda (they/them) (t/c) 18:59, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I agree, but a lot of posters have already been deleted, most recently this one because of the same reasons above. Sebastian James (talk) 17:08, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Pinging @Finnusertop: and @Atomicdragon136: for their opinions. Sebastian James (talk) 17:16, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It's not in the infobox, so it's clearly not used to identify the topic Russian Doll. For whatever else reason it's supposedly used,it doesn't have the necessary sourced critical commentary; it's purely decorative. I don't really care whether TV series articles use a logo or a poster; I don't have the expertise to tell which is more representative. But only one such image can convincingly be used to identify the topic in the infobox. The rest need critical sourced discussion in order to qualify. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:27, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]