Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2024 April 26

April 26[edit]

File:Ionapresentation.jpg[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 ⚡ 02:02, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence that this is not a recent rendering which attracts new copyright. Also consider this brief discussion at the media copyright questions noticeboard. Felix QW (talk) 07:17, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:King's Quest I - Quest for the Crown Coverart.jpg[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 ⚡ 02:02, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Superseded by File:SierraOnLine-Box-KingsQuest1.jpg, which is under a free license. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 07:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The copyright holder of the file hosted on Commons accepted uploading the poster to the repository. Almost failed WP:NFCC#1. Kys5g^talk! 15:12, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:You'll Never Get to Heaven (If You Break My Heart) - Dionne Warwick.jpg[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 ⚡ 02:02, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image taken from hitparade.ch was considered "irreplaceable" when my speedy deletion request was challenged with this rationale: The sleeve and the actual record are two different images and the sleeve is not replaceable with the record itself. Sure, the sleeve and actual record are two different items with different visuals, but upon further research, turns out the portion is not of a sleeve.

Indeed, when I requested speedy deletion, I just assumed it's a picture sleeve. I bet the one who challenged the request thought so as well. Actually, this is the front cover of a sheet music from overseas: ebay (1),ebay (2), abebooks. None of single releases use this image: discogs, 45cat. Not even the US release uses a picture sleeve. Unsure why hitparade.ch cropped the front cover and has posed it as a "cover art".

Of course, some editors would use a sheet music especially for the Beatles songs. This image, like any other sheet music or picture sleeve, uses an image of a singer and the song title. I'm more concerned about its ability to be contextually significant to the whole song You'll Never Get to Heaven (If You Break My Heart), especially if the image were to be omitted from this project. Furthermore, sheet musics have no longer been common since vinyl singles had been popular at the time.

Per WP:NFC#CS, justification for using the image depends on "due weight" and "balance", despite two common circumstances often used to prevent deletions of certain images. In this case, I've yet to see proof that the sheet music (or the image pretending to be a "cover art") is contextually significant to the song and that omitting the image would detriment understanding of the song. Reading the article, I couldn't find content that makes the song harder to understand without the sheet music.

The free image (File:Youll never get to heaven dionne warwick US single.png) doesn't have to comply with NFCC, especially the "contextual significance" part. Sure, it may not be the cover art, and it may not be a sheet music, but it's should be a more suitable replacement if the "irreplaceable" image I'm nominating is deemed NFCC-noncompliant. Even "irreplaceable" images may still fail NFCC. George Ho (talk) 19:46, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:"You Wouldn't Steal a Car".png[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 ⚡ 02:02, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The source video at the 0:06 mark has a few frames that consist only of text and a completely black background. I believe that would fall under the ToO. Ixfd64 (talk) 20:50, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Review and relicense per nom. While the entire video is copyrighted, a portion of the video that lacks originality isn't copyrighted. Kys5g^talk! 02:08, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've uploaded a new image at File:You Wouldn't Steal a Car.png on Commons. Ixfd64 (talk) 04:36, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:You'll Never Get to Heaven (If You Break My Heart) - The Stylistics.jpg[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 ⚡ 02:02, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My speedy deletion request was challenged with this rationale: The sleeve and the actual record are two different images and the sleeve is not replaceable with the record itself. The matter isn't the visual difference between the sleeve and the record. Speaking of sleeve, this cover art is of a German release (45cat, discogs). Of course, I challenged the image's "irreplaceability", but that's because "rfu"-tagged files have two days before deletion.

The bigger matter than the image's (supposed) "(ir)replaceability" is its "contextual significance" to the American pop(?) song "You'll Never Get to Heaven (If You Break My Heart)", sung multiple times. Per WP:NFC#CS, that depends on "due weight" and 'balance" of the song article. So far, I couldn't see free text having difficulty to describe the song without this image, and I haven't seen any content justifying use of this image. Furthermore, the whole image itself is just clouds in various colors with stripes, artist name, and song title. Also, the US release didn't use a picture sleeve.

The NFCC doesn't apply to the free image File:Youll never get to heaven the stylistics US single variant A.png in the way it does to this nominated image. In other words, the free image doesn't have to comply with the "contextual significance" criterion. George Ho (talk) 21:27, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Additional information needed - While it isn't required for the sleeve image to follow the "contextual significance" requirement, but if uploaded to Commons, and it doesn't used for educational purposes (or for personal purposes), it falls out of the scope of Commons, and will have the same luck as non-free media not meeting "contextual significance" requirement - deleted speedily. Kys5g^talk! 02:15, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.