Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 May 5

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: relisted on 2020 May 14. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:57, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sunday Bloody Sunday riff A.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

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.

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.

File:The Kinks You Really Got Me riff.PNG (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

File:The Kinks You Really Got Me riff.mid (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

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.

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.

File:Iron Man riff.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

File:Iron Man riff.mid (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

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.

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. Consensus of the discussion is that Threshold of Originality is not met. Stifle (talk) 12:48, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Air Senegal logo.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Benstown (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

• Also the vector version (File:Air Senegal Logo.svg) is available with fair use rationale.

I'm inclined to say that there is reasonable doubt as to whether the logo meets the TOO. Specifically, the shading that gives the work a "3D look" combined with the geometric shapes in different colours, may be the minimum amount of creativity necessary for copyright protection. We can keep File:Air Senegal Logo.svg, a better version, under the fair use doctrine, because the logo's status with regards to the TOO is unclear. See also this ruling by the US Copyright Office. MrClog (talk) 11:12, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. This FFD likely is the result of
  PD-logo}} or "PD-ineligible-USonly". In that case, there would no need to delete the png and both files can be used. Assuming that the country of origin is Senegal, the files could possibly be "PD-logo" if the logo would also be PD in Senegal; however, this is not clear per c:COM:TOO Senegal. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:15, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  Personally, I think it doesn't pass the TOO. Though the shading may be considered detail, it only has a slight colour change and no gradients. The shapes are very simple and only roughly 3 shades are used. The logo is official, and I extracted one of their flight promo PDFs with Illustrator, please correct me if I'm wrong. — Yours,

  ^Talk∕_Contribs 07:10, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  It's not that I don't think the logo is official; the question is whether the vector version was provided by the original copyright holder or whether you took the file from the pdf and vectorized it. If the former case, the svg should not be a problem, but in the latter case it's not clear and there's

  quite a bit of disagreement as to whether such files should be allowed. As for the TOO concerns, consensus will determine whether that's the case although I'm leaning towards it being at least OK as "PD-ineligible-USonly" given the relatively high TOO of the US and some of the examples given in c:COM:TOO United States. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:47, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• I would say it may not satisfy the TOO, but I would say there is at least reasonable doubt as to whether it does. The logo and specifically its 3D effect is somewhat similar to the American Airlines logo, which has been ruled to meet the TOO. --MrClog (talk) 12:00, 6 May 2020 (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.

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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons. Please nominate it for deletion there if you still feel it should be deleted. AnomieBOT⚡ 19:05, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pantheon voorportaal afmetingen.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by FilipAkatsuki (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Orphan most probably, as it is not being used on any wikipedia page with a purpose or contribution to the encyclopedic value or knowledge. I initially used it on the Pantheon in Rome page to explain measurements I made when I was there when I was a high school student, but it seems that this information, these measurements, this image is no longer being used in that page and therefore the image has no value. The only page the image is used in now is a page that gives an overview of uploads made by users, i.e. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:OgreBot/Uploads_by_new_users/2014_December_31_12:00, so my image really has no value anymore, is not being used in any informative wikipedia pages and therefore should be deleted. It is my request it be deleted and I think this shows it to be a reasonable request. Here is the link to the image: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pantheon_voorportaal_afmetingen.png FilipAkatsuki (talk) 12:47, 5 May 2020 (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.

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. Izno (talk) 18:11, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sailormoon-scap-01.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Crimsonseiko (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Delete per

• Hard disagree. This scene is important to highlight an important part of the anime, a critical scene in the show itself, as is implied in this part of the
  History of LGBTQ characters in animated series: 1990s article, I included this content to refer to an important part in the show itself. Its more implied than the other article, but I would say it is justified.--Historyday01 (talk) 19:13, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  The first case is pure plot, not critical commentary. You don't even refer to the scene in the second case. In both cases, the reader can understand the article without the image. — JJMC89 (T·C) 21:06, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll accept not having the NFCC on the

History of LGBTQ characters in animated series: 1990s, but in the first case, it is necessary to illustrate the show, as that scene is an important part of the show. So, deleting it would be a dang shame.Historyday01 (talk) 23:13, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

• Delete - The screenshot of the schoolgirl shocked by her first-time transformation neither is needed nor adds value to understanding what the anime adaptation is all about, especially generally. Furthermore, the scene itself can be already conveyed by brief words without the screenshot.
  WP:NFC#CS states that principles of due weight and balance apply. In this case, the emphasis of Usagi's first-time reaction isn't needed; the main character has gotten used to her transformation throughout the series. George Ho (talk) 23:38, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Can we at least keep it to so it can be added to the

Sailor Moon (season 1) page? Perhaps it would be better suited there.Historyday01 (talk) 00:39, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

The use of the screenshot at that page still wouldn't be suitable for the same reasons as above. George Ho (talk) 00:41, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I still think the image should be kept. I removed the image from the

Sailor Moon (anime)

page:

A 14-year-old underachieving young sailor-suited schoolgirl named Usagi Tsukino meets a magical talking cat named Luna. Luna gives Usagi the ability to transform into her magical alter ego — Sailor Moon — tasked with locating the moon princess and battling the evil forces of the Dark Kingdom. When Usagi transforms in the show's first episode, "A Moon Star is Born," with the help of Luna, into her magical sailor suit, she reluctantly accepts her fate, although she overreacts the first time she transforms, as shown in the screencap from the episode before the next paragraph, not sure what has happened to her. At the time she does not know the enemies she will face, the friends she will make, or the experiences ahead of her.^[1][2][3] As she moves forward, she accepts her fate, and realizes the importance of fighting evil.^[4]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Historyday01 (talk • contribs) 01:38, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How can text not make the screenshot replaceable? And why assuming that the text could not alone, without the screenshot, convey what occurs in the episode? I still don't see how any more improvements would increase justification for using the image. Most readers can understand well what you recently added without the image. By the way, there are other images already at "Sailor Moon (character)". Using the first-time transformation screenshot wouldn't improve readers' understanding of the character. George Ho (talk) 02:14, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I guess I have lost this round. Delete the image, I don't care anymmore. But people like you is why people don't post NFCC images on their articles at all and why I am terrified of even adding one image to any of the articles I edit, fearing it will be taken down almost immediately.Historyday01 (talk) 13:02, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's not entirely true. I don't intimidate those into not uploading images. I have uploaded non-free lead images. I barely use non-free images for body article, like the ones at The Year of Living Dangerously (film)#Casting and George Zimmerman#Paintings. Another example is death of Alan Kurdi; one of them was put to FFD twice, yet there was no consensus to delete. I believe that those images that I uploaded comply with NFCC. Think before you say any more about me. George Ho (talk) 20:55, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Non-free images of characters should be confined to articles about those characters, unless there is properly cited prose directly related to the image that is critical to the understanding of the topic of the article that the non-free image is used in. That isn't the case here. As an aside, there are already too many non-free images at Sailor Moon (character). Moving this image there would not be a good idea, and indeed some the images there may be NFCC 3a/8 violations themselves. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 06:43, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Looking through that article, all of the images seem to be justified, so there are ZERO NFCC violations on that page. Removing one image of Sailor Moon is enough, why do you think more need to be removed?Historyday01 (talk) 13:02, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Re-adding an image is not that hard to do provided it adds information that words alone can not express. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:55, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, however I would suggest moving to another article (i.e., the character article).--Loyalmoonie (talk) 02:08, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The caption in the article read "Usagi transforms into Sailor Moon for the first time, and overreacts to her new look." The issue here is that a-lot of anime has this cute reaction when the main character finds out they have transformed. I can name Tokyo Mew Mew, Puni Puni Poemy, and Is This a Zombie? (reverse gender) right off the top of my head. Just to throw out another example.... File:Bathing scene comparison.png is a good image to use as it compares releases in different countries due to censorship. Showing character changes due to x, y, or z helps the reader understand details what words alone can not portray. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:50, 29 August 2020 (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.

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: relisted on 2020 May 14. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:57, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fabian Ware.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

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.