Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 January 3



File:Din of Celestial Birds, Sep 2006, film poster.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. Sorry, but it doesn't seem like consensus here considers this use of the image as WP:NFCC-compliant. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:54, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
 * File:Din of Celestial Birds, Sep 2006, film poster.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Paleface Jack ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

originally nominated for dated deletion under WP:CSD by @JJMC89 as failing WP:NFCC  F ASTILY   06:39, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete: This file is currently orphaned which means it's going to be deleted per WP:F5 if not added to at least one article soon. Based on the non-free use rationale provided on the file's page, I don't see how the non-free use in Begotten (film) would meet WP:NFCC since movie poster art is not really considered OK to identify specific sections of an article about a film unless there is some sourced critical commentary about the poster art itself, not just about whatever is discussed in the relevant section. If the short Din of Celestial Birds is Wikipedia notable in its own right per WP:NFILM or WP:GNG and a stand-alone article can be written about it, then this file would be OK to use for primary identification purposes at the top of or in the main infobox of such an article; the same justification, however, is generally not considered acceptable for uses in sections of other articles which might be related to the film in some way but are not specifically about the film in question. So, simply re-adding this file to Begotten (film) would not meet NFCC#8 in my opinion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:08, 3 January 2020 (UTC)


 *  Delete per WP:NFCC. The Din of Celestial Birds poster is not used as the primary means of visual identification of the article subject (Begotten) and is not the subject of sourced critical commentary. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 00:18, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Sorry I didn't get to this sooner, I just readded the image to the article it was originally included in. The reason I feel this image should be kept is that it is a means of visual identification for Din of Celestial Birds which is merged with tha article of its predecessor Begotten. It serves as a visiual point of reference and identification for the film as it is considered by the director of both films to be a part of an unofficial series, which is mentioned in the caption of the image. The section the image is included in is notable as it discusses what Begotten's director referred to as a "spiritual sequel" to that film, exploring a different avenu (the theory of evolution as oppose to the originals exploration of creation myths and legends). If there are any other ways to improve the file information/details to keep it from being deleted I will be willing to do so.--Paleface Jack (talk) 17:44, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Looked over the image again, and the standards. I will list the reasonins for meeting WP:NFCC:
 * Image is not used in a way that would be detrimental to it's original market role as a film poster.
 * Fits minimum usage as it is limited to a single article, and is used to convey a similarity in visual style to its predecessor, something that is better conveyed through the use of an image.
 * Image description page lists the original publication, purpose, and reasons. There is no separate article on Din of Celestial Birds as that article did not have enough sources to consitute its own article and a concensus was reached that it was to be merged with the article on its predecessor Begotten.
 * Hope this clarifies things.--Paleface Jack (talk) 22:08, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * None of those three points support that criterion 8 is met. The first addresses criterion 2. The second addresses criterion 3. The third address criterion 10. As to your initial !vote, criterion 8 is about the article subject, and Din of Celestial Birds is not the article subject. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 03:33, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - it's use as visual identification is for a section and not the subject of the article, and there is no sourced commentary about the image. Fails WP:NFCC. -- Whpq (talk) 18:58, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete – Unless Din of Celestial Birds is created and the image is used only there. --- C &amp; C  (Coffeeandcrumbs) 05:51, 9 January 2020 (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:NFL All Time Team.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. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 22:07, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
 * File:NFL All Time Team.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Maxen Embry ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Fails WP:NFCI. It's neither cover art nor a corporate logo. It's a poster, and there is no critical commentary on the poster itself. (As an editorial aside, this resolution makes it horrid for illustrative purposes, even if it was free.) —Bagumba (talk) 16:08, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete A reasonably good compilation image, from free images, can be created to represent the members of this group. At size, the image is not good enough to be of any benefit to the reader in understanding the subject of the article. --- C &amp; C  (Coffeeandcrumbs) 05:56, 9 January 2020 (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 Fernandes.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 ⚡  20:47, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * File:Erica Fernandes.jpeg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Mayanksneh ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Images is claimed to have a cc-by-sa-4.0 license, with the image pulled from Instagram. I can't see anything there that supports that license statement. The metadata suggests this was pulled from Facebook which isn't compatible.  Ravensfire  (talk) 20:24, 3 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete as a clear copyright violation. -- Whpq (talk) 19:05, 6 January 2020 (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:Super Smash Bros 2018 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: relicense to PD-textlogo. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 22:10, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
 * File:Super Smash Bros 2018 logo.svg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Theinstantmatrix ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Below TOO (see File:Super Smash Bros. Ultimate logo.svg) 𝕒𝕥𝕠𝕞𝕚𝕔𝕕𝕣𝕒𝕘𝕠𝕟𝟙𝟛𝟞  🗨️ 🖊️ 21:44, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Relicense to pd-logo and transfer to Commons (or to PD-ineligible-USonly if Japan's TOO is to strict). Salavat (talk) 03:42, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
 * PD-textlogo and transfer to Commons (c:COM:TOO Japan is quite high). – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 14:34, 10 January 2020 (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:James R Sawyer COL.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 ⚡  09:05, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * File:James R Sawyer COL.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Don.H.40 ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Non-free image of deceased individual being used in a embedded list/table in 1st Medical Brigade (United States). Although Wikipedia does allow non-free photos of individuals to be uploaded and used per item 10 of WP:NFCI, this is pretty much only when the image is used for primary identification purposes in either the main infobox or at the the top of a stand-alone Wikipedia article about said individual. So, if a stand-alone Wikipedia article about this person can be written per WP:BIO, WP:SOLDIER or even WP:GNG, it might be possible to use this image is such an article. Wikipedia's non-free content use policy, however, doesn't generally allow non-free images to used for individual entries in tables or lists/embedded lists per WP:NFTABLES and WP:NFLISTS as in the way this file is currently being used. Moreover, there is nothing really "historic" about this image per se as explained in WP:ITSHISTORIC; old photos are not automatically historic because they're old, but rather because there are reliable sources which refer to them as being historic. There is also another problem in that there's no source provided for this photo except to say that it was provided by the subject's family. All non-free files are required to be "published" per WP:NFCC, which means this photo would also need to be shown to have been published somewhere for it to be kept.Now, assuming that the family does hold the copyright on the photo (i.e. it was taken by a family member), one way to keep the file would be for the copyright holder to email their WP:CONSENT to Wikimedia OTRS to verify their copyright ownership. The file's licensing could probably then be converted to a free license that the Wikimedia Foundation accepts, and its use would no longer be subject to Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:21, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.</b> 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.