Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 September 16

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
< September 15 September 17 >

September 16

[edit]

File:DW A Town Called Mercy titlecard (2012).png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 06:04, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:DW A Town Called Mercy titlecard (2012).png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by TrebleSeven (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

We only need *one* image of the unique logo for each episode this season, and that's on the main DW page. Fails NFCC#3a, NFCC#8 MASEM (t) 02:02, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Should File:DW Dinosaurs on a Spaceship titlecard (2012).png be deleted as well? --‖ Ebyabe talk - Border Town ‖ 02:26, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it should, same reasoning. --MASEM (t) 04:27, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No! We do need a title card for each episode, normally we would only need one per series, however this time where each title card is different it is appropriate that we have each unique title card.--Megamaxxor (talk) 03:55, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The "distinctions" are trivial. (Same font, same text, on the same bg. The only change is the "skin" which is easily described by text, and (unless noted by other sources) trivial. There is no automatic allowance for non-free title cards on episode articles. --MASEM (t) 04:27, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There should be an allowance, this all a bit too cold for me. In the first time in Doctor Who history, the title has changed for each and every episode. It's unique, try and find me another TV show which changes it's titles a bit to match the episode's feeling. I can bet there isn't. This is exclusive, interesting, and gives the reader an idea of what the episode is about by how the title portrays the episode's plot. It's something which shows how unique the show is. No other show is like it. It illustrates the article without spoiling the plot for viewers who hadn't had the chance to watch it yet. Honestly, I feel it's a bad decision deleting the file. 777 — 14:59, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would also would hate the images to go. However, using specifically the 8th criteria of the NFCC policy; "Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding", the first episode image increases readers understanding that the logo has changed and will change again. The second episode increases the understanding to exactly how it will change in each episode. By the third episode there's nothing left to understand. ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 17:45, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I will actually point you to an example, Peter (Fringe), from the series Fringe takes place about 30 years prior. As such, the intro sequence for that show was changed to use a "retro" look. This was noticed by reviewers and commentary, highlighting it as part of the critical nature of this episode as well as mentioned by the development, and ergo there is sufficient reason to keep this one different image as used here. While I'm sure a bit of scratching can find sources that mention the change of the font here, I've not seen any (in the article or otherwise) critical commentary on it. Also, we don't hide spoilers (per SPOILER). We don't use images just to identify something, as that makes it decorative. --MASEM (t) 00:23, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would like them to stay as unique but know from experience images on TV episodes are very difficult to get past editors. Asylum of the Daleks appears in three articles with only one rational. Episode Infoboxes should as said above have an allowance. There are copyvios all over wikipedia especially in TV and films and other media articles but Doctor Who, due to its popularity will always come under special scrutiny, Shame. maybe a gallery could be created on the Doctor Who series seven page REVUpminster (talk) 18:17, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • That would be expressly forbidden (we don't have non-free galleries or tables of non-free images). If on some off chance all these title cards reveal something deeper at the end of the day, similar to the story arcs, perhaps we can talk then, but not now. --MASEM (t) 00:25, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I see what you are saying. Does this mean I should no longer upload a new image of the title when the next episode comes out? 777 — 17:21, 20 September 2012 (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:Unt3.JPG

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Unt3.JPG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Rajatkalia (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Orphaned logo for a what looks like a non-existent organisation Biker Biker (talk) 08:36, 16 September 2012 (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:Unt2.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Unt2.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Rajatkalia (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Orphaned logo for a what looks like a non-existent organisation Biker Biker (talk) 08:36, 16 September 2012 (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:Microsoft Powerpoint Icon.svg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Microsoft Powerpoint Icon.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Ffgamera (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

The logo is an SVG image, but it only contains an embedded PNG in it. I have uploaded it as a PNG directly as File:Microsoft PowerPoint Icon.png and replaced it in the article Microsoft PowerPoint, and this file should be deleted to avoid redundancy. Converting the embedded PNG into vector graphics is not an option, as it will result in a failure of WP:NFCC#3b as SVG images can be scaled to resolutions high enough to create copyright infrigements. jfd34 (talk) 09:51, 16 September 2012 (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:Spinelli Maxie Non Wedding.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 06:04, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Spinelli Maxie Non Wedding.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Kelly Marie 0812 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

non-free image of two characters to do little other than decorate the article. Image does not significantly add to reader's understanding of the topic of the character - fails WP:NFCC#8 Peripitus (Talk) 12:50, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The storyline the photo represents is important and unique to the character. Also the other character shown in the photo is important to numerous storylines of the subject character. Kelly Marie 0812 (talk) 13:59, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't there be a discussion or reply to my comment before the photo is deleted? Kelly Marie 0812 (talk) 04:26, 24 September 2012 (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:Jsabcpromo001.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:04, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jsabcpromo001.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Cake0610 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

non-free image used to simply show two characters in shot. In the only article it is used in there is already and adequate non-free image of the discussed character. Fails WP:NFCC#8 and WP:NFCC#3a Peripitus (Talk) 12:53, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree the photo does not add to the storylines and if needed a better photo could be found to represent and explain that section's time period. Kelly Marie 0812 (talk) 14:01, 16 September 2012 (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:Www.rootsbd.com-wp-content-uploads-2012-09-Afghanistan-Cricket-team-won-Trinidad-Quadrangular-T20-Series-2012.jpg.png.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Www.rootsbd.com-wp-content-uploads-2012-09-Afghanistan-Cricket-team-won-Trinidad-Quadrangular-T20-Series-2012.jpg.png.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Pratyya Ghosh (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

non-free image used to show a side celebrating. Text alone can adequately accomplish this. Fails WP:NFCC#1 and WP:NFCC#8 Peripitus (Talk) 12:58, 16 September 2012 (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:OtisReddingStatue.jpg

[edit]
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 for now. The image fails WP:NFCC#8 if treated as non-free, however, this image may be restored later by any administrator if we end up receiving permission from the sculptor to release imagery of the statue under a free license. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:03, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:OtisReddingStatue.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Bubba73 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Previously nominated for deletion but kept because an OTRS permission was claimed to have been sent, however more than 2 months later no OTRS Ticket has been attached. See Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 July 4#File:OtisReddingStatue.jpg. ww2censor (talk) 13:42, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well either if did not pass scrutiny or has not been dealt with otherwise a ticket number would have been attached to the image file. I'll ask someone to look at it. ww2censor (talk) 18:08, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I submitted it about July 7. OTRS replied to me on July 24. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 22:46, 16 September 2012 (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:Apple iOS.svg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Apple iOS.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Colejohnson66 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

This file already exists on Commons making this local copy redundant. Either it's free and belongs on Commons (hence, we should delete this copy) or it's a copyvio and should only be kept here. I have brought it up in both places. 68.173.113.106 (talk) 23:40, 16 September 2012 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2012_September_16&oldid=1131473379"