Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 September 19

< September 18	September 20 >

September 19

File:2007 Nicholas Benton.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 as G7 by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:02, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:2007 Nicholas Benton.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by HAJ1300 (notify | contribs).

The image serves to identify the subject, and show that he appeared on a front cover of a magazine, however these uses are replaceable by a ~~non~~ free image with text. PhilKnight (talk) 12:30, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Assuming the nominator meant to say "...replaceable by a free image and text", I agree; delete. Stifle (talk) 13:14, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. Fixed. PhilKnight (talk) 15:10, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

delete fails Wikipedia:Non-free content#Unacceptable use Images #8- replaceable non-free fair use Skier Dude (talk) 20:21, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This photo passes a variety of WP policy guidelines: Per WP:FUG this is acceptable in illustrating a point in the article. Furthermore, in accordance with WP:FUG, it is an image of the main subject of the article. It is also, per WP:FUG an image being used as the primary means of visual identification of the subject or topic. Additionally, per WP:FUG, it illustrates the topic of the article. In keeping with WP policy, the magazine name is clearly visible in the image. Furthermore, and please take note, WP ALLOWS the image in the article of the person or persons depicted on the cover when they to "directly illustrate a point about the publication of the image." I would welcome a substantive discussion based on WP policy. HAJ1300 (talk) 20:36, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DELETE IMMEDIATELY. My mistake...please accept my apologies.HAJ1300 (talk) 23:44, 19 September 2009 (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:Zimmer buggles.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 Seresin (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:45, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Zimmer buggles.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Ianmacm (notify | contribs).

Non-free image of a person who has already got a free image in his article. Image is not the subject of critical commentary in the article, nor is it so significant as to increase readers' understanding of the article in the manner required by WP:NFCC#8. Stifle (talk) 13:07, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For goodness sake, this is the sort of thing that makes Wikipedia look silly in the mainstream media, see [1]. This is a very low resolution image from 1979 showing Hans Zimmer at the age of 22 (he is now 52, and the current infobox image from 2006 is poor but meets WP:NFCC). About a week ago, I received an e-mail from Hans Zimmer's PR representatives at Chasen PR asking to use this image in the infobox: [2] They uploaded it to Commons, but I advised that it could not be used if it was copyrighted, see User talk:Chasenpr. I do realize that some people have very strict ideas about fair use, but please let's have a bit of common sense here. I have pulled out all the stops while trying to illustrate Hans Zimmer within WP:NFCC.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 13:25, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm aware of the NYTimes and other commentary. None of it takes into account that Wikipedia is meant to be the free encyclopedia, which means that uses non-free content should be few and far between, and avoidable wherever possible. The image in the infobox does not meet WP:NFCC, because it's a free image and doesn't have to.

This isn't a case of "strict ideas" and "common sense", it's that we only use non-free and fair use images when we absolutely have to. Here, we don't. Stifle (talk) 13:30, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I e-mailed Chasen PR to ask if they would release the copyright on the black and white infobox image of Hans Zimmer at [3], but did not receive a reply. As for the 1979 image, it relates to Zimmer's contribution to Video Killed the Radio Star, and is specifically mentioned in the text of the article. I've never seen my role on Wikipedia as being a lawyer who can second guess the wishes of the copyright holder, and cannot see much wrong with the use of this image within WP:NFCC.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 13:45, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose deletion. This is a case where the image conveys information that is not otherwise conveyed. The image is of the guy at a significant, early point in his career. He looks utterly different than he does in the free image. I do believe the free image is better in the infobox. -Pete (talk) 19:05, 19 September 2009 (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:Way To Go! UK Promo CD2.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. Text clearly explains the cover variations, and if you are using the cover to illustrate members of the band, free content can plausibly be used/created to illustrate the same point (thus failing WP:NFCC #1). Andrew c ^[talk] 16:58, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Way To Go! UK Promo CD2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by The Rogue Leader (notify | contribs).

This image fails WP:NFCC#3a as there is already a separate image of the album cover on the article. Even if it did not, it would fail WP:NFCC#8 as its removal would not affect readers' understanding of the article. Stifle (talk) 13:09, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly disagree. It does affect the user's understanding because the members on the cover you want to delete are different to the members on the cover above. On the cover above the members are (not in order) Natalie Bassingthwaighte, James Ash, Steve Davis and Tim Henwood. On this cover, Danny Spencer replaces Tim Henwood.--The Rogue Leader 03:35, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

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:Wm26.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 Rettetast (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:45, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wm26.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Orpheuss (notify | contribs).

Image is not the subject of critical commentary in the article, and fails WP:NFCC#8 as its removal would not be detrimental to readers' understanding of that article. Stifle (talk) 13:13, 19 September 2009 (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:WalkLikeAnEgyptian.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 Seresin (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:45, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:WalkLikeAnEgyptian.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by HongQiGong (notify | contribs).

This is merely a non-free image of one of the singers, and adds nothing to readers' understanding of the article on which it's used. Stifle (talk) 13:16, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The image illustrates the music video for the song Walk Like an Egyptian. The music video is discussed in that article. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 14:39, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This Image - Suzanna Hoffs' facial expression in the closeups is a key and memorable part of the video that cannot be fully described with words. Stmblbm (talk) 13:12, 28 September 2009 (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:UntitledMV.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 Seresin (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:45, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:UntitledMV.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Dan56 (notify | contribs).

This image is merely a non-free depiction of the artist, and adds nothing to readers' understanding of the article about the song. Stifle (talk) 13:22, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's your opinion. Dan56 (talk) 19:59, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose deletion It adds to the readers understanding of the song's music video and its controversy. Dan56 (talk) 17:52, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose deletion The image of D'Angelo in that video is the subject of at least half of the article's text. C'mon now. Dan56 (talk) 17:59, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Non-free or not, it certainly adds more to the article and readers understanding (D'Angelo's nakedness in the video is discussed and analyzed throughout most of it) than most of the "free" use images that are used as decoration or just depiction of the artist on other GA Articles. Dan56 (talk) 20:02, 20 September 2009 (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:Trojan and Bowery.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 as G7 by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:37, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Trojan and Bowery.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Benjiboi (notify | contribs).

Two non-free images of the same person in one article; one or the other violates WP:NFCC#3a. Stifle (talk) 13:26, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wasn't aware of the 3a rule, it can go as it only shows the evolution of their artistry. Hopefully someone will donate images that will help document their look. -- Banjeboi 11:59, 20 September 2009 (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:Tori-Crucifyvid-twins.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 Seresin (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:45, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tori-Crucifyvid-twins.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Jacqui M (notify | contribs).

This image fails WP:NFCC#1 as it adds nothing to the article that the textual description of the image does not provide. Stifle (talk) 13:27, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but Reduce: I think this image can be kept, as it shows a cultural reference in which the music video found its inspiration, which is explained and sourced in the article ("the twin Toris who sing together at a counter, clothing "reminiscent of Anne Boleyn""). All ideas can be described by text only, but in this case, this means that screenshots are not allowed on WP. This is my opinion. Europe22 (talk) 19:52, 27 September 2009 (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:Pat Nixon Signature.threshold.svg

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 as G7 by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:37, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pat Nixon Signature.threshold.svg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Certes (notify | contribs).

Was used to illustrate options in a debate which has now closed. Certes (talk) 16:47, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose deletion~~ - That discussion was not long ago, and it's not inconceivable that somebody might want to refer back to it. The image is apparently public domain, and pretty small. What's the harm in keeping it? (Note: If the participants in the discussion endorse deletion, that would be good enough for me.) -Pete (talk) 18:57, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Response: I proposed deletion simply to tidy up an unencyclopaedic file which I created, so it doesn't clutter up WP. My contribution is PD (and I understand its source is PD in the USA), so if there's any real possibility that it may be useful again then you're welcome to keep it. Certes (talk) 19:34, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake, I did not notice you were the one who had created the file! Sorry for the confusion. Support deletion. -Pete (talk) 20:14, 19 September 2009 (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:10px-600px-Red x.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 (Note: I just replaced the 2 occurrences of the older file, with the newer file from Commons.) Killiondude (talk) 07:38, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:10px-600px-Red x.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Lestatdelc (notify | contribs).

Available on Commons as File:Red x.png, but not a bit-for-bit identical. SchuminWeb (Talk) 18:29, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If the nominator replaces the image in the articles that use it, I'll return with a support vote. -Pete (talk) 18:52, 19 September 2009 (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:23sigmatropic.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 Killiondude (talk) 07:41, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:23sigmatropic.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Mazhe2 (notify | contribs).

Available on Commons as Image:2,3-sigmatropic rearrangement.svg, but not identical. SchuminWeb (Talk) 18:35, 19 September 2009 (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:JAGS McCartney.jpeg

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 Rettetast (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:45, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:JAGS McCartney.jpeg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by AmazonPeacock (notify | contribs).

no web source provided; if taken from "National archives" uploader would not be (c) holder Skier Dude (talk) 21:23, 19 September 2009 (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.