Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 October 19



File:1-bromodecane.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 AnomieBOT ⚡  05:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * File:1-bromodecane.png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Ice bear johny ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Low graphical quality (size/resolution, background, margins). Commons already has commons:File:1-Bromodecane.png and commons:File:1-Bromo decane Structural Formula V1.svg so no need for this poorer one. DMacks (talk) 05:07, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete, redundant to Commons file. Salavat (talk) 00:33, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
 * awe alright delete the file
 * 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:Homoarginine.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 AnomieBOT ⚡  05:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * File:Homoarginine.png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Mamidi1 ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Low graphical quality. Have File:L-homoarginine.png on commons, drawn to modern MOS. DMacks (talk) 09:45, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete, redundant to Commons file. Salavat (talk) 00:34, 20 October 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:Karan Aanand Interview.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 ⚡  05:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * File:Karan Aanand Interview.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Trueknockdigital ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Per uploader's description, the image has been previously published. Such images require OTRS verification. Ytoyoda (talk) 13:22, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 00:34, 20 October 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:Ishaq Jamkhanawala Orating.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 ⚡  05:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * File:Ishaq Jamkhanawala Orating.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Reddragon77 ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Appears to be a derivative work (a photograph of another image). Need more information on the source image. Ytoyoda (talk) 17:09, 19 October 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:Deluxe edition album artwork for Little Mix - Salute.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 ⚡  05:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * File:Deluxe edition album artwork for Little Mix - Salute.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by B.Davis2003 ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Fails WP:NFCC and should be deleted. The uploader added the "deluxe edition" album covers to all five Little Mix albums to date – I am not convinced that any of them are different enough to pass WP:NFCC#3a, but this is the most blatant example. It's literally the same photo as the standard album cover File:Little Mix Salute (Official Album Cover).png, the only difference being a filter used for the photo and the font colour has been changed. It doesn't even say "deluxe edition" on the front cover, so there's no way you would know it's the deluxe version as opposed to the standard version. I tried removing this file but was reverted by the uploader with the message "does not fail", and then left a polite message on their talk page asking them to explain how this passes WP:NFCC but they have not replied. The style guide for album articles states that for additional album cover art, "Covers that are essentially similar, despite differences in colouring, poses, text, etc., should not be included." Richard3120 (talk) 19:06, 19 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Support Image fails to meet the non-free content criteria points 3a and 8. Additional artwork(s) does not significantly enhance a reader's understanding of the topic; any difference in artwork can be reliably sourced within article, and explained within text. Artwork is also not greatly different from recognized standard edition, already included within article.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 17:31, 20 October 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.