Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2015 August 24

< August 23	August 25 >

August 24

File:SummerSlam 4Horsewomen.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 as F7 by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:10, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not a fair use image for the reasons given. Article targeted (SummerSlam (2014)) is not appropriate as it is trivia with no proven connection to the show. Has no other known use on Wikipedia. 110.148.128.37 (talk) 07:19, 24 August 2015 (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:Madonna - i want you.ogg

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 ⚡ 07:04, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8 has no critical or understanding significance to the article, removing it has continuously been edit warred by nominator giving lame excuses like NFCC says it passes —Indian:BIO ^{[ ChitChat ]} 11:43, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article discusses the cover and it's by far the most notable of all covers that have been recorded. Alecsdaniel (talk) 22:21, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No it does not dicuss the cover in terms of disecting its composition, nor does it discuss how it varies from the original version to warrant a separate sample of the same song. Please touchbase your self with the different points of WP:NFCC#8 especially. —Indian:BIO ^{[ ChitChat ]} 08:00, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't have to. All that WP:NFCC#8 requires is that its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:33, 28 August 2015 (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:Major Moon Collection Catalogue Cover.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: keep. Per WP:NFC#UUI, if a cover is subject to critical commentary that aids in critical understanding of the article, its inclusion can be justifiable. In this case, that seems to be the case. — ξ ^xplicit 06:01, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This image fails WP:NFCC. It has been used in 3 articles: Arthur Moon, Ashley George Old and Prisoner-of-war camp and only one has a fair-use rationale which is contrary to #10c of our non-free policy. I removed the other two uses. Book covers are normally only used in articles about the book itself not in other articles, especially as all uses have no sourced critical commentary about the image itself. The fact that this collection catalogue exists, and in some cases, is clearly made by prose so the reader's understanding of the topic is not detrimentally affected by removing it. The use of this non-free image is unnecessary and purely decorative; it add nothing to the articles. ww2censor (talk) 18:14, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep file. The book cover adds massively to the understanding of the topics. It is compliant with policy. All the cited articles have been reviewed by multiple editors and the editor above is the only one to take the view the cover should be deleted. The cover was present when the Major Moon article featured in DYK and had thousands of views without issue.Tomintoul (talk) 18:57, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain specifically how the use of this non-free image massively adds to the understanding of the topics. Normally that would be obvious from the non-free rational but two uses had none which is why I ask. The fact that multiple editors have reviewed the articles does not mean they have any knowledge or understanding on our non-free image policy nor that they even reviewed the image itself in that context. If there is any evidence of this please provide it. In fact many editors have no in depth knowledge of copyright and especially non-free images. As I already pointed out to you, a DYK has no bearing on the image use in an article and may never have even been considered, unless you have some evidence of that too. The number of article views has absolutely no bearing on this discussion. This only concerns whether the image fails or passes our non-free policy and if it does, each and every use must pass all 10 non-free image policy guidelines. Failing just one point fails the image from that article which is why for now the uses that lack rationales have been removed. ww2censor (talk) 14:10, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Fair use rationale provided. Image does significantly add to the articles and is not purely decorative. Hawkeye7 (talk) 09:56, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is only a WP:FURG for one use, not for the 3 uses it had, and that rationale does not even have a decent reasoning.

Obvious Keep As above. SNOWBALL this one please. Maury Markowitz (talk) 11:50, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There is now a WP:FURG for use in both Ashley George Old and Arthur Moon. WolfmanSF (talk) 02:25, 26 August 2015 (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:PMS Torino logo.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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Replaced by the File:Auxilium Torino logo.png as the article Auxilium CUS Torino subject's means of identification, this non-free logo has no more rationale for use of a copyright ArmstrongJulian (talk) 19:41, 24 August 2015 (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:Prokhorovka, Battle of Kursk, night of 11 July.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 as G7 by Jenks24 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:12, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded the wrong image by mistake EyeTruth (talk) 22:50, 24 August 2015 (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:Prokhorovka, Battle of Kursk, 11 July night.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 as G7 by Jenks24 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:11, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded the wrong image by mistake EyeTruth (talk) 23:13, 24 August 2015 (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.