Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2015 September 25

< September 24	September 26 >

September 25

File:Tropes vs woman.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. None of the arguments for keeping addresses the issues regarding Wikipedia's non-free content policy. Such vague statements as "image context is provided", "It works for TvW's page" (whatever "works for" is supposed to mean) and "no reason to not have it" do not make any attempt to explain why the image's inclusion satisifes that policy. The policy says "Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding", and nobody has given any reason whatever to indicate why that should be considered to be the case for this image. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 11:53, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8; there appears to be no sourced commentary in Anita Sarkeesian on this particular image. RJaguar3 | u | t 03:42, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Previous discussion: Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2013_January_18#File:Tropes_vs_woman.jpg --NeilN ^{talk to me} 03:50, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep not even sure why this is raised, image context is provided by the paragraph it is adjacent to. Not entirely clear what "sourced commentary" is. Koncorde (talk) 06:24, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think this image would be better suited to Tropes vs. Women in Video Games (which didn't seem to exist when this file was first uploaded). I support it being used there (under the Background section) but not on Anita Sarkeesian. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 14:59, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: It works for TvW's page, no reason to not have it on the wiki. Zero Serenity ^{(talk - contributions)} 10:18, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- @Koncorde, Bilorv, and Zero Serenity: What purpose does the image serve on Anita Sarkeesian or Tropes vs. Women in Video Games that is not already fulfilled by the public domain image File:Tropes Vs. Women in Video Games - text logo.png? This raises an WP:NFCC#1 issue too. RJaguar3 | u | t 15:08, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't actually realise File:Tropes Vs. Women in Video Games - text logo.png was free (I'm not an expert but I wouldn't have thought that it was sufficiently simple to qualify as ineligible for copyright), but to answer your question the images are completely different. The free one is a title card used during the YouTube videos themselves, while the non-free one is specifically about the Kickstarter campaign and illustrates information outlined in the Background section of the Tropes vs. Women page rather than general information about the format of the episodes. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 15:17, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Bilorv: I don't see how the non-free image provides additional contextual significance beyond the text in the article about the Kickstarter campaign. The non-free image might satisfy WP:NFCC#8 if, for example, there were reliable sources discussing the Kickstarter image specifically and how it affected the campaign. RJaguar3 | u | t 15:27, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Interestingly enough, I took part in the last FFD! As such, closing this discussion would be in conflict of interest on my part. The same issues present two years ago are present today. The use of this logo in either Anita Sarkeesian or Tropes vs. Women in Video Games is entirely unjustified. As long as the article it's being used in is not specifically about the Kickstarter campaign itself, and the logo does not increase the understanding of the the article it's being used in nor would its omission be detrimental to the understanding of the article, this file violates WP:NFCC#8 at its core. Yes, Anita Sarkeesian used women on the logo of a campaign to start a video series that looks into the issue of gender representation in video games, but we don't need the logo to understand that. — ξ ^xplicit 07:01, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and replace instances of use with the free replacement File:Tropes Vs. Women in Video Games - text logo.png. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 03:58, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The image File:Tropes Vs. Women in Video Games - text logo.png is currently used both on the page where File:Tropes vs woman.jpg is now and where I suggested it should go, so you cannot use it as a replacement for File:Tropes vs woman.jpg. The question isn't "can we replace this with a free image?" so much as "can we have this non-free image as well as this free one?" — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 06:50, 5 October 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:Once Upon a Time, season 5 art 2.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 ⚡ 08:03, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The image being used has no passable notation of WP:NFCC#8, and as a result has been used only for promotional purpose, not for identification or aid of any critical commentary. Previous images to this article was also deleted as can be found here. —Indian:BIO ^{[ ChitChat ]} 11:59, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I plead that this image not be deleted. It's pertinent to a main story point that is most notable to the season. It is quite justifiably used. It is not being used as means of promotion, but rather as an information piece. LLArrow (talk) 17:03, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

LLArrow, if that is the case the rationale in no way reflects that, nor the content of the article where it is being used. When we use a non-free content, we use it to support some particular context, and as you say its pertinent to the main story, it should do that then, reflect what is its importance. —Indian:BIO ^{[ ChitChat ]} 04:28, 26 September 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:BlackBerry Classic official.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:03, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Invalid fair use claim because free equivalent is entirely possible, i.e., people can take a picture of this device and release the picture under a free license. Wcam (talk) 13:44, 25 September 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:Dinadan.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) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:03, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, too low quality to be of any use. Stefan2 (talk) 21:14, 25 September 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:Diff.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) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:03, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. No foreseeable use. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:16, 25 September 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:DST.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:03, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. No foreseeable use. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:17, 25 September 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:DPM.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:03, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. No foreseeable use. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:19, 25 September 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:El Salvador USA Locator.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:03, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Commons has a better map with the same name which we can use if we ever need a map like this again. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:21, 25 September 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:Dunno.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) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:03, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unused userphoto. No foreseeable use. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:24, 25 September 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:Abuse and Misuse Potential of Pregabalin A Review of the Clinical Evidence.pdf

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 ⚡ 00:01, 26 September 2015 (UTC) I uploaded it to photos and it is a pdf file and I'm sorry. I no longer want it. This will not happen again. Thank you.{{subst:ffd2}}.}}/ Eharlacher91 (talk) 23:51, 25 September 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.