Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/TimedText:YannyLaurel.ogg.en.srt

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: delete. RL0919 (talk) 18:15, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

TimedText:YannyLaurel.ogg.en.srt

Subject to a ton of pointless edits and I don't think this could ever be useful (the dispute over what the clip says is the whole reason why it's relevant). Elli (talk | contribs) 05:22, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'll try and take this one on since it seems no one else is interested. WP:TIMEDTEXT is an accessibility feature, and in general quite helpful for deaf readers. Now, while being subject to many pointless edits is not a WP:DELREASON (but potentially a reason for protection), I'm not sure if this needs to be retained either. The only conceivable use for this file is Yanny or Laurel which already explains things in such a way that the timedtext is redundant. But this doesn't fall into the class of redundant files as we usually think of them. At this point my common-sense thought is to delete as useless at the present time, but I'm not really firm in that assessment, and I'm unlikely to be able to follow up here. If no one else is interested call this a weak delete, if someone presents a case for why this accessibility feature is in fact needed just ignore this comment. Regards, 188.232.146.110 (talk) 16:50, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Timed text is an accessibility feature. It isn't just for deaf people, but for people who are hard of hearing or just need help understanding what is being said. There's endless reasons why timed text is useful and I have never encountered a situation where Wikipedia benefits from having it removed. The fact that you nor I can really see a benefit to this isn't a reason to delete, as there may be someone who actually does benefit from this. Accessibility is an important enough concern IMHO that vague ideas of people maybe being helped is enough for me to !vote keep. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 04:19, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Chess: I understand how timedtext works. Timedtext is supposed to provide an accurate transcription of spoken words. There is no possible way to accurately transcribe this clip. There is one word spoken, and it is either "yanny" or "laurel", and the fact that no one can determine what word it is is the entire reason this audio clip is used. If you look at the history of this page, this has never been valid srt, and therefore never actually displayed when someone turned on captions for the audio. It therefore provides, and cannot provide, any accessibility benefit to anyone. Elli (talk | contribs) 05:02, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The point of this clip is that it's impossible to transcribe, and as such no transcription could possibly be helpful to anyone, including those for whom TimedText is normally of value. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:35, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As others noted, it's impossible to transcribe this which is the entire point of the recording as seen in the article Yanny or Laurel. It's also worth noting that none of the versions in the history have been correctly formated to do anything. --Trialpears (talk) 23:55, 30 December 2021 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.