Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2022 May 3

< May 2	May 4 >

May 3

File:Fagligt Fælles Forbund logo.svg

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:03, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Per c:COM:TOO Denmark, this is probably copyrighted and File:3F logo.svg should be converted to fair use. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 12:31, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - file is unsuitable for Commons and not used in any articles. Ixfd64 (talk) 20:45, 3 May 2022 (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:Film director Chel White 2016.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:03, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Doubtful own work. Description states image was taken in 2016 but EXIF says otherwise (2012) --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 13:48, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 02:20, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! You're right about the date error. We can correct it. Mikeindiacharlie (talk) 02:30, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! You're right about the date error. We can correct it. Mikeindiacharlie (talk) 02:31, 26 May 2022 (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:Gatelogo 160x158.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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:07, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, only intended for Gate Petroleum, which was deleted in October 2020 via AFD. No foreseeable encyclopedic use. ✗plicit 14:28, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 02:21, 5 May 2022 (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:Aid for Trade Global Review 2017 – Day 1 (35486819660).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: procedural close. File is on Commons. Ixfd64 (talk) 20:55, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree file: in the description it says that it "may be reproduced provided attribution is given to the WTO and the WTO is informed" BlauerBaum (talk) 20:29, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lizence is CC-BY-SA-2.0 Atamari (talk) 21:09, 3 May 2022 (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:WBBL05CapLogoHurricanes.svg

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. No prejudice to restoration if someone is able to create a valid fair use claim for the image. -FASTILY 20:33, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Almost certainly above the threshold of originality in its source country (Australia) and possibly even the U.S. as well. Currently used in five articles, so fair use will have to be decided on a case-by-case basis. Ixfd64 (talk) 20:49, 3 May 2022 (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.

"Better Call Saul" images

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. ✗plicit 23:33, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the discussion at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2022 May 1 for more context. These non-free images are being used in the infoboxes for episodes of Better Call Saul. The non-free usage rationales do not state a purpose; they just describe the scene. The images' use is decorative, and the removal of the image would not detract from a reader's understanding of the article. Fail WP:NFCC#8. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 21:53, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

*Strong Keep - Per reasons stated in previous discussions. Nominator didn't even read the description for the Bagman image, which states "In this highly acclaimed episode, Mike and Saul get stuck out in the desert after Saul's trip to deliver Lalo's bail money goes awry. This episode received 3 Emmy nominations and has extensive sections covering its production and reception. The image serves to help readers quickly identify this iconic episode, and the relationship between Saul and Mike is referred to throughout the article.". Nom. is really a bad-faith attempt to wipe my contributions, not a genuine concern for a serious violation of NFCC. Content does not fail NFCC#8 as it meets contextual significance as it represents the subject of the article. The presence of the photo significantly increases reader's understanding by showing a key scene from the episode, and is useful for those who are watching the show to follow along Wikipedia's episode list to keep up with the plot. Omitting the image detracts from that understanding. LJF2019 ^talk 01:25, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Mike and Saul get stuck out in the desert". BAM! You just found a text alternative and the image becomes unnecessary. That's how it works. You say, "The image serves to help readers quickly identify this iconic episode ... and is useful for those who are watching the show to follow along Wikipedia's episode list to keep up with the plot". This is the problem with YOUR uploads (NOTE for people reading this discussion, LJF2019 is the uploader of a majority of these images), you use them as bookmarks. You seem to fail to understand what "contextual significance" is. It is not a bookmark or a reminder of what episode someone is watching, it is a piece of information that is visually significant that received attention/analysis. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 01:44, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, and you seem to fail to understand what common sense is. Get off the computer for once and interact with people face to face, Wikipedia isn't how the real world works. Why the hell would I replace a picture from the episode with TEXT describing the scene? One is clearly better than the other, and literally no one else has had any problem with my pictures except you. Why don't we replace all the images from the episodes with "text" in the infobox where a PICTURE should be? I'm sure that's improving the encyclopedia. Nerd. LJF2019 ^talk 01:56, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Per our NFC policy, a freer alternative to a picture is a text replacement if that conveys the same information and does not detract from understanding the content. --Masem (t) 02:01, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Masem: The policy is stupid, and his behavior irks me because it can be argued that adding a photo to an article inherently provides readers with more information to work with. Moreover, the image is reduced and not full scale and is only used in the infobox. His problem is that he fails to understand why someone would be so hostile toward him sitting on his computer and nitpicking a policy for pictures that have stayed up for a significant amount of time. What it boils down to, in the end, is his giddiness for the removal of content. It's like he has nothing better to do. Inclusionism vs. Deletionism. You, as an administrator, should be fully aware that this is exactly what drives editors to quit editing at Wikipedia. LJF2019 ^talk 02:04, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What's with the name calling? If you're so passionate about the images, send them to the BCS fandom, where they'll gladly be accepted. Small note, but some of these images are also from IMDb and not the episode itself. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 14:34, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Masem, Mythdon, and Whpq, any votes/comments? Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 01:46, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't WP:VOTESTACK like that. —Mythdon (talk • contribs) 01:49, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"inform editors on all "sides" of a debate ... everyone who participated in a previous deletion debate on a given subject". Notified everyone who added a comment at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2022 May 1. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 01:52, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Then you could've done so as soon as your started the discussion, rather than waiting until someone !voted keep before notifying only users that agreed with you in the other discussion. —Mythdon (talk • contribs) 01:53, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete within the context of WP:TNT, as per the Breaking Bad images. There is potential, given the attention to the show, to highlight certain screenshots with sourced commentary, but that should be found first before images are added. --Masem (t) 02:00, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all - Simply illustrating the plot does notmeet WP:NFCC#8. -- Whpq (talk) 13:39, 5 May 2022 (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.

Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2022 May 3

Contents

May 3

File:Fagligt Fælles Forbund logo.svg

File:Film director Chel White 2016.jpg

File:Gatelogo 160x158.PNG

File:Aid for Trade Global Review 2017 – Day 1 (35486819660).jpg

File:WBBL05CapLogoHurricanes.svg

"Better Call Saul" images

Navigation menu

Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2022 May 3

May 3

File:Fagligt Fælles Forbund logo.svg

File:Film director Chel White 2016.jpg

File:Gatelogo 160x158.PNG

File:Aid for Trade Global Review 2017 – Day 1 (35486819660).jpg

File:WBBL05CapLogoHurricanes.svg

"Better Call Saul" images

Navigation menu

Search