Talk:Never Be the Same (Camila Cabello song)

Music video screenshot removal and expansion on section
In order for the screenshot to remain on the article to satisfy WP:NFCC#8, should I find more extensive references to further illustrate the significance couture has on the music video, in addition to commentary about the video itself? I feel that a large portion of the music video is highly concentrated on the juxtaposition of landscape and fashion, which hasn't been expanded on in the article, and needs more information and notable sources anyway. Your thoughts on this? — Angryjoe1111 (talk) 13:29, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , Wikipedia does not make use of non-free content for decoration. It is added when it demonstrates something, the non-inclusion of which would be detrimental to a reader's understanding of the article. There is nothing noteworthy or controversial about Cabello's outfit in this music video, thus inclusion of a screenshot is completely unjustified. If you added more written content about her outfit, it would only make the inclusion of the screenshot more useless since the text would demonstrate the outfit even better; thus eliminating the detriment of removing the non-free screenshot. So unfortunately there is nothing anyone could do to justify keeping it. It is not needed here.—NØ 15:06, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for explaining this to me. I will proceed to find sourced information describing the music video in coherent detail without the use of visuals. — Angryjoe1111 (talk) 17:54, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I've finished adding information to the music video section regarding critical commentary and improved reference structuring; however, the guidelines for WP:NFCC#8 haven't been very specific in the context for which music video screenshots are allowed to be used without the need for any subjective issues, which is evident in a good article and a featured article, where both use screenshots and captions that directly oppose the non-free content criteria, which would have been reviewed in order for those articles to gain their respective classes on the quality scale. I've re-added the screenshot while renaming the caption that summarizes the general critical consensus of the video with appropriate references, which should be enough to satisfy the non-free criterion that you had initial concerns with. I hope you understand the changes I have made, as the lack of specific information provided in criteria #8 has made it difficult for readers to comprehend the section without the use of a visual stimuli. — Angryjoe1111 (talk) 20:34, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * The screenshot is still unnecessary and not needed. Non-free content should be added because it is needed to demonstrate something; rather than fishing for a justification to include it after it was initially removed for being purely decorative. The music video is linked to in the infobox in case anyone wanted to check out the aesthetic (which isn’t noteworthy in the first place so it is a huge stretch to assume anyone would be interested). People can just watch the video to receive all the visual stimuli they want. The other two articles should not be used to make an WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument when both the songs are from decades ago and have obviously more noteworthy videos. For every FA/GA you find with an unnecessary screenshot, there are 20 that do not make the same mistake.—NØ 21:01, 15 October 2019 (UTC)