Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2019 November 29



File:LCDBONG41-300.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 ⚡  08:05, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
 * File:LCDBONG41-300.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Sunil060902 ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Fairly similar to standard edition, no critical discussion or obvious educational value, fails WP:NFCC. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:29, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, I've deleted it from the "Peace" article. Sunil060902 (talk) 09:58, 2 December 2019 (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:Erica C Barnett.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 A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:05, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
 * File:Erica C Barnett.png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Chetsford ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

No longer being used. . Pinging administrator for thoughts, since he's this file's original uploader, following the AfD of Erica C. Barnett. As the file uploader, he could also speedy delete. Doug Mehus T · C  21:28, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I would also noted that administrator GB fan removed my CSD G8 criterion as apparently not being a valid reason. I'd take issue with that, though, because I checked and it explicitly states that image pages not being used by any articles is a valid CSD reason. So, potentially, we could re-CSD this, but I'd appreciate administrator 's clarification of that as a sort of administrative peer review. Doug Mehus T · C  21:32, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I cannot find where at WP:CSD it "explicitly states that image pages not being used by any articles is a valid CSD reason". Is it one of the bulleted reasons - which one is it? Count "talk pages with no corresponding subject page" as the first one and "categories populated by deleted or retargeted templates" as the sixth. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 12:19, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * if you can show me where it says that G8 applies to images not used in any article then I will delete it. I cn not find where it says that.  I see one example that discusses image, "image pages without a corresponding image".  This has an image so that example does not apply.  ~ GB fan 14:33, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * and, I was referring to "image pages without a corresponding image." If I misunderstood that, perhaps that needs refining on the policy page maybe, I'd appreciate clarification. Doug Mehus T · C  02:00, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
 * In "image pages without a corresponding image", the "image page" is the page bearing the file information - description, date, source, licensing etc. - which in this case is File:Erica C Barnett.png; and the "corresponding image" refers to an image being displayed in the Thumbnail column of the top row of the file history (there may be more than one row), in this case File history has one row, and that row shows an image in the Thumbnail column, so there is a corresponding image for the image page, therefore G8 does not apply. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 10:49, 1 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete - This file is a duplicate of the file at Commons. The issue at Commons is whether the image is properly licensed.  Although the Flickr source states it is freely licensed, there is evidence that the files are uploaded to the account with the free license automatically applied without regard to whether the flickr account holder really is the copyright holder.  I see two possible likely outcomes from the Commons discussion.  The file could be found to be improperly licensed and deleted.  In that case, the file here on the English Wikipedia would also be improperly licensed and would need to be deleted due to copyright issues.  The file could be found to be properly licensed and kept at Commons.  In that case we have the file available on Commons with a free license so there is no need to keep a copy on the English Wikipedia.  For either outcome, there is no reason to keep the file on the English Wikipedia.  Note the assertion by the nominator that the file is eligible for G8 is simply not valid. -- Whpq (talk) 15:55, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , That makes sense. Good analysis. Regardless of the outcome at the Commons, where it's leaning "delete" or "speedy delete," it should be deleted here. Thanks! Doug Mehus T · C  02:02, 1 December 2019 (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.