Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2013 December 13

< December 12	December 14 >

December 13

File:Britnney High.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 F11 by Secret (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Apparent fan art project, Not clear if this has a usage. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:05, 13 December 2013 (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:Bill Gates and the head of Sony engage in a death match.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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:07, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8. Just Decoration. Blurred Lines 05:44, 13 December 2013 (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:Millwall FC 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: Deleted - note that this image was redundant to the extant File:Millwall FC logo.png png file of the same thing - Peripitus (Talk)

Fails WP:NFCC#3b: unreasonably detailed SVG file. Stefan2 (talk) 15:32, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unreasonably detailed? How so? Malpass⁹₃! (what I've been ^up to/_drop me a ^___) 14:18, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The SVG file is a nearly perfect rendering of the lion. This becomes clear if you for example look at the 2000px version provide by MediaWiki. Compare with for example Wikipedia:Non-free content review/Archive 21#File:Mickey Mouse.svg. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:46, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Mickey Mouse deletion here has limited relevance. One of the main reasons why consensus to delete was found there, as I understand it, is that the Mickey Mouse image was not a logo. This is, and comes direct from a publication by the club itself. Malpass⁹₃! (what I've been ^up to/_drop me a ^___) 17:30, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Both logos and images of Mickey Mouth have to satisfy WP:NFCC#3b. There have been cases where vectorised logos have been found to fail WP:NFCC#3b, but it's difficult to find them. There should be some examples in the archives to WP:NFCR. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:47, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When did it become to okay to not cite your sources in administration zones of Wikipedia? It wouldn't be allowed in the article namespace, so why is here any different? The vast majority of the category Category:Vector images of trademarks - some 11,790 images and counting - are SVG images, and have been seen as acceptable under fair use for a very long time. All of which - thanks to the way vector graphics develop - are capable of delivering high-resolution imagery. Is this grounds to delete all 11,790 SVG trademarks? We'd need a far more wide-ranging discussion to delete them all. All that said, I am oppposing deletion. Malpass⁹₃! (what I've been ^up to/_drop me a ^___) 15:09, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See numerous discussions in the archives for WP:NFCR and other WP:FFD discussions. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:15, 17 January 2014 (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:PermissionToUploadKatyHudson.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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:07, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Only purpose is to tell that some images are licensed under {{db-f3}}. No foreseeable use. Stefan2 (talk) 15:44, 13 December 2013 (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:KatyHudsonPermission.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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:07, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unused image only used for granting {{db-f3}} permission for some unspecified photos. No foreseeable use, as the permission isn't useful for us. Stefan2 (talk) 16:04, 13 December 2013 (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:Ted soundtrack.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 G7 by Ronhjones (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:FILM#Soundtrack Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 18:44, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Taylor Trescott: I just read the link you provided, and nothing convinces me why it should be removed. Could you be more specific? Blurred Lines 18:49, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Blurred Lines: consensus is against having cover images in the album infoboxes in the film article. The poster image in the film infobox is sufficient for identification of the topic, and having cover images in the film article's album infoboxes is considered extraneous. If an album is notable enough for a stand-alone article (see notability guidelines for albums), one should be created, and an album infobox with a cover image can exist in the new article. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 19:49, 13 December 2013 (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:Farida2.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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:08, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Undated, Orphan Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:10, 13 December 2013 (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:Ali-jinnah.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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:08, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Undated , Orphan image. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:13, 13 December 2013 (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:Steiner GWTW 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: Delete; deleted by Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:14, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8: cover art in the article about the composer, see footnote to WP:NFCI §1. Stefan2 (talk) 20:53, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Supports the commentary and an entire section by displaying the album cover printed with his name, thereby significantly increasing a reader's understanding of the topic:

In 1939, Steiner was borrowed from Warner Bros. by Selznick to compose the score for his next film, Gone with the Wind (1939), which became one of Steiner's most notable successes. --Light show (talk) 07:37, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

- There is no critical discussion about what the cover looks like. Cover images in articles about composers need critical discussion about what the covers look like; see the footnote to WP:NFCI §1. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:56, 18 December 2013 (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:Marceau and Jackson.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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:08, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8: there's no critical discussion about this photograph. Stefan2 (talk) 20:56, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article's photo commentary which significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic:

In 1995, pop megastar Michael Jackson, who had been friends with Marceau for nearly 20 years, planned a concert together with him for HBO.

It should meet NFCC#8 guidelines by showing them rehearsing for that show. --Light show (talk) 06:47, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is zero critical discusison about what that meeting looked like, and no image is needed to know that they met each other; see WP:NFCC#8. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:57, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The photo shows them rehearsing together, as explained in the commentary, not just meeting each other.--Light show (talk) 08:09, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but that they were together is already understood from the text, so additionally providing this information by using an image violates WP:NFCC#1. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:37, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Fails NFCC8, meaning fully conveyed by text. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 14:20, 14 January 2014 (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:Dear Abby.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:14, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 21:23, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Supports commentary and significantly increases readers' understanding of the topic:

Both Phillips and her sister enjoyed socializing with celebrities, and because of their notoriety, celebrities liked being seen with either of them. Among Phillips' friends soon after she began her column were . . . . Jerry Lewis and Dean Martin. --Light show (talk) 06:56, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

- There is zero discussion about what that socialising looked like, and you can easily imagine people standing next to each other. See WP:NFCC#8. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:58, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It shows the three people discussed being together, not just "people standing next to each other." --Light show (talk) 08:07, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but that they were together is already understood from the text, so additionally providing this information by using an image violates WP:NFCC#1. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:38, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Fails NFCC8, meaning fully conveyed by text. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 14:21, 14 January 2014 (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:Hoffman-Bancroft-the-graduate.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:14, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 21:24, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Supports the commentary and significantly increases readers' understanding of the topic:

Confused about what to do with his life, he is seduced into having an affair with Mrs. Robinson, an alcoholic and a neurotic, and the wife of his father's business partner. --Light show (talk) 06:52, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

- There is zero discussion of what the two people looked like when they were right next to each other, and you can easily imagine what it looked like when two people are next to each other, so we do not need an image showing that; see WP:NFCC#8. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:59, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's showing "seduction," not just two people next to each other. --Light show (talk) 08:05, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You can easily understand what it looks like when people seduce each other without seeing a picture of it. Replaceable by text: "one person seduced another person". See WP:NFCC#1. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:39, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Fails NFCC8, meaning fully conveyed by text. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 14:21, 14 January 2014 (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.