Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2025 July 16

July 16

File:Henri Huet, LIFE cover, 110266.jpg

Replaceable with c:File:Life magazine – Jaws 45th anniversary issue (2020-06-19).jpg or other covers in c:CAT:Covers of LIFE magazine per WP:NFCC#1 (unless someone can prove that Henri Huet published the photograph without a valid copyright notice). JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 01:42, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The suggested replacement file is of a 2020 cover of ife Magazine commemorating the 45th anniversary of the movie Jaws. It has no relation to the original image whatsoever so is not a suitable replacement. In particular, the subject matter of the suggested replacement is entirely inappropriate for use in the Henri Huet article. Cactus.man ✍ 10:23, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was specifically referring to the infobox at Life (magazine), not the gallery at Henri Huet § Work. I admit I did not see the fair use rationale for the Henri Huet article when I nominated the file. JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 13:21, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@ JohnCWiesenthal I agree, it would be a sitable substitute for use in the infobox at Life (magazine), but Keep the file (not delete it) because the fair use rationale for use in Henri Huet remains valid. Cactus.man ✍ 15:29, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Queen of Hearts - Juice Newton (1981 - Netherlands release).jpg

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: delete. Ixfd64 (talk) 23:15, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

De-PRODded by an IP editor without rationale. Uncertain why the IP editor did that. The other (standard) cover art is already used to identify and associate with the well-known version. I'm still unconvinced that the alternative cover art is necessary, especially per WP:NFCC#3a. George Ho (talk) 04:29, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I agree that this file is unnecessary per WP:NFCC#3a. Opm581^{(talk | he/him)} 10:40, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Her Mother Susan Coconut Grove FL Circa 1974A.jpg

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 Pppery (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:13, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We already have free images of both Amy and Susan Billig, so this file is uneccesary. The "relation to mother" rationale is valid but since we already have an image of Susan holding a sign with Amy's face on it that could equally represent their relation I don't see this one being neccesary. ^EF⁵ 19:29, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Survivor 41 dvd region 1 season forty-one.png

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 F5 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:00, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Previously nominated only because it was "orphaned". Only participants were the admin and the uploader, and that's about it. Now concerning is the DVD cover being rehashed as a PNG file. Also, the other FFD discussion from 2022 favored the logo (File:Survivor 41 Logo.png), which was unfortunately replaced by the now-blocked uploader of this file I'm nominating now. (I can't help figure out why the previous nominator didn't look up and cite the other FFD discussion that I'm doing now.) George Ho (talk) 19:36, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Survivor 42 dvd region 1 season forty-two.png

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 F5 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:00, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DVD cover intending to replace the logo of Survivor 42 (File:Survivor 42 Logo.png) still probably more inferior than the logo itself. It just shows the series's host/producer and some generic logo. Also, uploaded by now-blocked user. The logo should be reused instead. George Ho (talk) 20:58, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Survivor 43 dvd region 1 season forty-three.png

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 F5 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:00, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DVD cover intending to replace the logo of Survivor 43 (File:Survivor 43 Logo.webp) still probably more inferior than the logo itself. It just shows the series's host/producer and some generic logo (and some background with silhouetted shadows). Also, uploaded by now-blocked user. The logo should be reused instead. George Ho (talk) 20:59, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Jennifer Lopez - Booty (Remix featuring Iggy Azalea).ogg

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 Pppery (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:13, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The portion of the song is not supporting critical commentary about elements of the song. The only justification appears to be that this is about the remix but elements of the song are not discussed and therefore WP:NFCC is not met >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 22:53, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep since there is enough sourced critical commentary to justify its inclusion thereby passing WP:NFCC#8. Aspects (talk) 04:14, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:46, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Why does having sourced critical commentary matter? Hearing the sample, I can hear fast beats and singing. (Don't get me started on lack of captions, which may not prevent a sample from being deleted potentially.) I appreciate identifying the song and trying to improve illustration of it, but the matter is whether omitting this sample will affect the understanding of the song.
As I see it, words aren't that complicated to grasp, IMO, and a few versions of the song were made and then released. Nonetheless, the one by both Lopez and Azalea was more successful, and a sample isn't needed to figure out the version's success and storytelling, right? Thus, I'm unsure why critical commentary should prevent the sample from being omitted. George Ho (talk) 00:09, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.