Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 November 21



File:Erich Hoyt Profile.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 AnomieBOT ⚡  04:02, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * File:Erich Hoyt Profile.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Mojibber ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Smaller versions exist on multiple websites - requesting WP:OTRS confirmation of own work. – Train2104 (t • c) 02:23, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * 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:Hermes Pan.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: keep. ℯ xplicit  02:54, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * File:Hermes Pan.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Black BIC Ballpoint ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

I don't believe this photo is a "unique historic image," and lamentably I can't think of another appropriate non-free use justification. Coretheapple (talk) 21:13, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep - Photograph of a deceased individual of encyclopedic interest for whom no free use alternative file is available. If the Fair Use rationale is defective, fix it, do not delete. Carrite (talk) 02:37, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ℯ  xplicit  06:07, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment The fact that someone is dead does not make a photo of him or her a "unique historical image." I wish it was, for if so it would make illustrating articles much easier. There is nothing to fix, as there is no applicable fair use rationale. Coretheapple (talk) 14:07, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually, that does make American fair use law valid for that image if housed at En-WP with the correct rationale and presuming that the image is of sufficiently low resolution, etc. So hopefully you use this information to become more courageous illustrating WP articles. Carrite (talk) 17:04, 23 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep This is a fair use image of a deceased individual. The only free image in the article, File:Astaire and Pan in Second Chorus 2.jpg, has Pan in the background out of focus, with the focus of the screenshot on Fred Astaire. That image cannot serve the same purpose in identification of the subject and thereby pases WP:NFCC. Aspects (talk) 01:17, 22 November 2017 (UTC)


 * All ten criteria needs to be met. You think it meets #8: " if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding"? In the past this has been utilized to not include just this kind of photograph. I'm all for removing this part of our non-free criteria, which in my view are too restrictive, but right now that's what we have. Coretheapple (talk) 16:03, 22 November 2017 (UTC)


 * It meets WP:NFCC and WP:NFCI#10 as a fair use image for a deceased person. Aspects (talk) 01:17, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
 * 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:Swarnim Startup &

 * 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: No consensus. Open for nearly 2 months without new comments/!votes. This might get more attention at Media copyright questions. - F ASTILY   07:35, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * File:Swarnim Startup & ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Muhandes ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Seems like this file is simple enough to be public domain in the US, and thus may need to be tagged with PD-logo. Steel1943 (talk) 19:13, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. Is this a reason for deletion? If you think it should be tagged as PD-logo go ahead and do that. --Muhandes (talk) 19:15, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
 * This isn't necessarily a deletion discussion, that's why it's called "Files for discussion". It's necessary to obtain consensus before switching a tag to PD-textlogo. Jon Kolbert (talk) 19:22, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't come here much so maybe this is the practice. Anyway, that's not what the blue box at the top says, someone should fix it. Have fun discussing it. --Muhandes (talk) 19:26, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
 * In clear cases of an image being free in the United States, I replace the non-free rationale template with Information and the non-free licensing template with PD-logo or whichever related template. However, I'm not sure enough about this one to boldly make the changes myself due to the curvy shapes in the logo. Thus, I'm seeking input and consensus to make the changes. Steel1943  (talk) 20:14, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ℯ  xplicit  06:25, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * 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:IreneDebbie.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 AnomieBOT ⚡  04:02, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * File:IreneDebbie.JPG ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by SFTVLGUY2 ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

There are two media images used in the article Irene (musical), the sheet music cover in the public domain and this poster for the revival. The sheet music cover poster is used in the infobox and the revival poster is used in the Later productions. The rationale from the revival poster is "it is a key visual representation of the musical that is the subject of the article". The revoval poster fails WP:NFCC in that the sheet music cover already is used in the article for means of identification and is a key visual representation of the musical. It also fails WP:NFCC because there is no commentary about the poster thereby doing nothing to increase the reader's understanding of the film and its exclusion is not detrimental to the understanding of the musical. Aspects (talk) 23:42, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep: This article is about the musical Irene, which was a hit 1925 show that had its *ONLY* major revival in 1973, starring Debbie Reynolds. The revival was an star vehicle for Reynolds and enjoyed extraordinary success, despite the dated nature of the musical. This image is the revival's theatre poster, showing the importance of Debbie Reynolds to the production.  I am not sure that this theatre poster is even under copyright.  No copyright notice seems to appear on the poster (perhaps the image should be converted to "free"?).  In any case, there are no other free images that would adequately represent this important production, and the poster is the best image to represent this the musical, with the original artwork for the musical showing Reynolds in the title role.  The image is extremely helpful to our viewers, especially when compared with the artwork from the original 1925 production.  -- Ssilvers (talk) 00:45, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The poster does not show the importance of Debbie Reynolds to the production, only that she was in the show. There does not need to be an image for the any revival of shows unless there was critical commentary about the image itself in the article. Lacking this critical commentary, the poster still fails WP:NFCC. Aspects (talk) 00:00, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The poster shows only Reynolds -- there is nothing else on the poster! It emphasizes that the production was revived as a star turn for Reynolds; this revival was the only major production of the musical after 1923.  The poster also illustrates the *tone* and style of the production, so its visual contribution to the article is important to the reader's understanding of the revival. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:08, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ℯ  xplicit  06:25, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The article does not discuss the poster at all, much less with reliably-sourced commentary (WP:NFCI). There is no reliably-sourced material in the article that reaps benefits in understanding with the image's presence nor would be negatively impacted by the image's removal (WP:NFCC).  Based on these guideline- and policy-based deficiencies, and finding no overriding arguments in its favor, we should delete this file.  —   fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124;  20:13, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * 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:Mr Swirl.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 AnomieBOT ⚡  04:02, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * File:Mr Swirl.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Celuici ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

According to the file description page, we're using this copyrighted media "[t]o illustrate the image manipulation technique". Application of the technique itself does not confer copyright, and could therefore be applied to any freely-licensed image to show a before-and-after of the technique's results. WP:NFCC requires that "[n]on-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose." We do not know the copyright status of the original photo (and therefore its derivative work). BBC News only said that Interpol released the photo, but not where it was taken and under whose copyright laws it falls. The file therefore cannot meet WP:NFCC, which requires "[i]dentification of the source of the original copyrighted material". Lastly, we have no evidence that this file "has been published or publicly displayed outside Wikipedia by (or with permission from) the copyright holder" as required by WP:NFCC. —  fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124;  20:00, 21 November 2017 (UTC) —   fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124;  20:00, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * 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:Michael Tchong.jpeg

 * 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 AnomieBOT ⚡  04:02, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * File:Michael Tchong.jpeg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Mtchong ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

uploader appears to be subject of image, no proof photographer released the photograph under a free license Jon Kolbert (talk) 20:03, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * 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.