Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 May 1

< April 30	May 2 >

May 1

File:JTI Cigarettes are lethal.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 ⚡ 02:02, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

per c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:JTI Cigarettes are lethal.jpg Magog the Ogre (t • c) 01:03, 1 May 2017 (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:Lucy Mancini.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: remove from Jeannie Linero. ℯ xplicit 04:01, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free image of a fictional character portrayed by an actress being used in both the article for the fictional character and the actress. Usage in Jeannie Linero, the actress fails W:NFCC#1 as one may create a free image of a living person. Recommend it be removed for the actress. Whpq (talk) 11:01, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unsure - Both articles are very problematic, "Jeannie Linero" and "Lucy Mancini". The BLP article has notability issues while the other doesn't have real-world perspective. The character article should be merged into List of The Godfather characters or List of minor characters in The Godfather series or somewhere else. Unfortunately, the merger would affect the usage of the image. George Ho (talk) 03:50, 9 May 2017 (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:File name.ext

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: Erroneous Nomination. When following the listing instructions (step 2), you need to replace "File_name.ext" with the actual name of the file. You'll also want to put the name of the uploader just after "Uploader=", and your reason just after "Reason=". Feel free to just replace this entire section with the corrected template. If you are still having trouble, ask for help at WT:FFD or at my talk page. AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:06, 1 May 2017 (UTC) Error: You must replace File_name.ext with the actual name of the file you are nominating for deletion when using {{subst:ffd2}}. 101.222.224.118 (talk) 11:26, 1 May 2017 (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:Kishore Biyani.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 ⚡ 02:02, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm concerned about this image, which is obviously taken by a professional photographer. It appears to be used on the cover of a book published in 2007 (see here), years before the 2010 upload. There is confusion between the name of the declared uploader - Rsaccent (talk · contribs), who claims "own work" - and the "author", who is the subject of the photograph. It is the only still extant image that Rsaccent uploaded (there has been at least one deletion). While the claimed creation date is in 1990, the book is definitely a 2007 publication. Would a publisher of a book of this nature really use a photograph that was taken 17 years previously? Sitush (talk) 15:20, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The claim to being the copyright holder is dubious at best. Uploaded one other image was a copyright violation based on its nomination. The image uploaded is a size consistent with images used fir the web. A crop of this image at http://profit.ndtv.com/news/corporates/article-kishore-biyani-led-future-group-launches-digital-loyalty-wallet-futurepay-1470654 gives a photo credit to futuregroup.in --Whpq (talk) 16:42, 1 May 2017 (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:MANJARI SINGER.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 ⚡ 02:02, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence uploader is copyright holder. Kelly ^hi! 15:42, 1 May 2017 (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.

Bad Case of Loving You (Doctor, Doctor)

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 main cover per default, delete the others. ℯ xplicit 04:01, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Currently, three images are used in the article. One is the Dutch vinyl release. The other is the UK release without the song title. The third is the French release similar to the UK release but with the song title. To represent the song's origins, which I usually prefer, I vote to keep the UK release (where the song was recorded) and delete the other two. However, if success is the most important factor, the song was more successful in the Netherlands than in the UK. Therefore, the Dutch release may be "kept". The song was successful in the US, but the US release used generic sleeve, so a vinyl label cannot be used for the consensus would oppose using it. I welcome other opinions here. --George Ho (talk) 21:27, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am not too fussed about which image we choose, but I would say my first choice would actually be the French sleeve, since it is similar to the UK sleeve (and thus still may be essentially recognizable to UK audiences) but has the song title listed, making it a slightly better identifier for the song article from that perspective. And the single apparently performed better in France than in either UK or the Netherlands, for whatever that is worth. I have to say that I would not object to using the US label either. Rlendog (talk) 16:10, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

For those curious about the US label, here's one from 45cat. George Ho (talk) 17:54, 8 May 2017 (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.