Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2019 January 21

< January 20	January 22 >

January 21

File:Sonya dyakova cookbook.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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:27, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the designer of a book cover owns the copyright - that would be the publisher. Therefore, the release under CC is invalid. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:35, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 02:43, 28 January 2019 (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:Sonya dyakova pt.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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:27, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Same as the one above: I don't think the designer of a book cover owns the copyright - that would be the publisher. Therefore, the release under CC is invalid. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:36, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 02:43, 28 January 2019 (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.

Non-free video game covers in Disney's Animated Storybook

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:28, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nine non-free video game cover files being used in a decorative manner in Disney's Animated Storybook#Title which fails WP:NFC#cite_note-3, WP:NFCC#8, WP:NFTABLES and WP:NFLISTS. Generally, non-free cover art for albums, books, videos, video games, etc. is allowed per item 2 of WP:NFCI when the cover art itself is being used for primary identification pruposes at the top of or in the main infobox about the work it represents, or when the cover art is itlself the subject of sourced critical commentary in the body or the article. Simply using non-free files to illustrate entries in a list of works like a discography, bibliography, videography, etc. has pretty much never been allowed, especially when there is no critcal commentary at all about the cover art itself. There is already a file (File:Disney's Animated Storybook.svg) being used for primary identification purposes at the top of the article, the claim that the non-free files are also needed for the same purpose is simply incorrect. Now, if someone feels that separate stand alone-articles can be written about these games and wants to use the files for primary identification purposes in those article, then that might be acceptable per WP:NFCCP; as currently used, however, these files should be deleted since their respective non-free uses don't comply with relevant policy. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:23, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – With the current setup of the article (in particular, because there are no other articles on these games, and because of the size of this article), I believe the inclusion of the cover art is due. As usual, it is used for the primary identification of each of the games, as might be needed. The article contains no non-free images other than these nine. The usage here is fair, eventhough it doesn't comply with past decisions on somewhat similar situations. That being said, I can see point 2 of WP:NFLIST in particular being of interest here, and I could certainly be persuaded to agree with this deletion if other parts of the article can use non-free images more than the table does. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 09:44, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The usage of these images as they currently stand do not meet the NFCC as outlined in the nomination. -- Whpq (talk) 00:54, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, purely decorative and fails NFLIST. Salavat (talk) 02:43, 28 January 2019 (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:Access to Airport.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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:31, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

low-quality map, could be replaced by OpenStreetMaps Jon Kolbert (talk) 15:29, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 02:45, 28 January 2019 (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:Adam Blair Kiwi.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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:31, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

low-res photo, no evidence of permission and likely license laundering through Picasa. No EXIF data either Jon Kolbert (talk) 15:37, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - this is a low res version of File:Adam Blair.JPG from Commons which does include EXIF data. -- Whpq (talk) 01:03, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - No evidence of licence laundering, so not likely or unlikely. This pre-dates the shutdown of Picasa.Fleets (talk) 11:10, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - this is an unused low resolution version of the commons file. Irrespective of the licensing, there is no need for this file. Essentially, this could be deleted as WP:F8. -- Whpq (talk) 12:44, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, redundant to Commons file. Salavat (talk) 02:45, 28 January 2019 (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:Adriana Marmorek screenshot.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 DragonflySixtyseven (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

corrupted file, likely copyvio anyway Jon Kolbert (talk) 15:40, 21 January 2019 (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:Aeneas.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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:32, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

unused crop of File:Aeneas and Turnus.jpg Jon Kolbert (talk) 15:42, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, redundant to Commons file. Salavat (talk) 02:46, 28 January 2019 (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:AéroportBORDEAUX.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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:32, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

too low in quality to be of realistic encyclopedic value Jon Kolbert (talk) 15:44, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 02:46, 28 January 2019 (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.