Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2021 December 23



File:All Sounds of Final Fantasy I·II mix.ogg

 * 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 ⚡  03:03, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
 * File:All Sounds of Final Fantasy I·II mix.ogg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by DarkEvil ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Currently used in Music of Final Fantasy I and II. More about identifying merely two tracks than about identifying the context of the music of two Final Fantasy video games. Deleting the sample wouldn't affect the understanding of the music as a whole. May fail "contextual significance" criterion. George Ho (talk) 08:11, 23 December 2021 (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:KevinZebWoods.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 ⚡  13:08, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
 * File:KevinZebWoods.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Kevin Rector ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

this is a photo of the uploader, the photo was taken by someone else. missing evidence of permission. F ASTILY  10:00, 23 December 2021 (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:Hemphill Pontiac opening announcement, Journal Pioneer.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 ⚡  03:03, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
 * File:Hemphill Pontiac opening announcement, Journal Pioneer.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by WhiteyChev ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

No freedom of panorama for 2D graphic works in the United States. Uploader says they own the business, but there is no proof of this. Image is not used anywhere. Ixfd64 (talk) 18:08, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 00:46, 24 December 2021 (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:SobraniePacket.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 ⚡  03:03, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
 * File:SobraniePacket.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by Jonomacdrones ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Unused derivative work — see c:COM:PACKAGING. Ixfd64 (talk) 18:14, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 00:47, 24 December 2021 (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:Me and Bobby McGee - Janis Joplin.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: Textbook WP:NFCC (and WP:NFCC) violation. As always, no prejudice to restoration if the article is significantly expanded to explicitly discuss this image in-depth - F ASTILY   01:28, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
 * File:Me and Bobby McGee - Janis Joplin.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | links | [ logs]) &#x20;– uploaded by JGabbard ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Image de-PRODded, so I'm listing it here. The freer side label of the US single is uploaded and then used. This listed image is a cover art used for German and Dutch single release s. Furthermore, I'm unsure whether it identifies the song in context, whether it serves a purpose different from as the other (side label) image does, and whether it is irreplaceable. I'll provide more soon. George Ho (talk) 23:59, 23 December 2021 (UTC); edited, 00:44, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Well, the cover art looks similar to that of Pearl (Janis Joplin album), but that shouldn't be the only reason to delete it. Indeed, identical artworks of American Pie (song) and American Pie (Don McLean album) are used; the one in the song article turns out to be that of the US single release. I'll provide more examples if necessary.

The "contextual significance" criterion (WP:NFCC and WP:NFC) demands this cover art, which I'm listing here, to identify and improve understanding of the song (and its single release(s)) in context, and to be too relevant and significant for deletion. Links prove the artwork to be that of the Dutch single: discogs, 45cat, ebay (1), ebay (2). (German single uses different layout but same artwork.)

Displaying the artist and song title(s) isn't part of the context of critical commentary about the song (and single releases) and shouldn't be the main reason to save the image from deletion. Furthermore, readers would still understand the song, especially as one of Kris Kristofferson's songs covered by multiple artists like Joplin, even without the cover art. Moreover, the US side label, even when not a picture sleeve, may provide the same purpose as the Dutch cover: identifying a single release associated with one of the recordings. The US side label is also free to distribute and use, even when it looks boring and doesn't show the artist (or any elements) and the song title physically.

BTW, I'm unsure why the same uploader has let the cover arts of overseas releases of Aretha Franklin's "I Say a Little Prayer" cover recording and O'Jays' "Love Train" be deleted but then contested my PRODding on the Dutch cover art of Joplin's "Me and Bobby McGee" cover recording. Furthermore, I don't see why this nomination should be (treated as) any different from other two cases. George Ho (talk) 00:44, 24 December 2021 (UTC); edited, 02:37, 24 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Said uploader has perhaps just been too engaged with real life to squander precious time contending with every annoying instance of said nominator's tendentious actions in this regard. But if it's a sparring partner he wishes for, uploader may provide just that.
 * The fact that an image originates in a nation other than the U.S. or the UK is an irrational reason to seek to remove or replace it, with no WP policy to justify such actions. And experience has shown that readers do not prefer to see "boring" side labels when a picture sleeve is available. An image of the singer with art work from the era of the song helps readers to make better connections with an artist's work. - JGabbard (talk) 23:11, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
 * If you've been "too engaged with real life", then why would you contest the PROD tag? Anyways, an "available" picture sleeve would be still subject to NFCC, which still restricts and minimizes use of acceptable non-free content. Furthermore, the "boring" side label would make any picture sleeve of any non-US single release replaceable. Or, the Dutch picture sleeve itself would inadequately identify the significance of what's discussed in context.
 * Honestly, I fail to see how this situation would be any different from the other FFD discussion, which resulted in deleting an overseas picture sleeve and favoring a "boring" US side label. Also, I think we shouldn't go down to the argumentum ad populum (appeal to masses) based on which is "boring" or more appealing to others. Back to the image, other than looking appealing and helping users recognize a singer and song title within the image, I still fail to see why the Dutch sleeve should be used in lieu of the "boring" side label, available in Commons. --George Ho (talk) 00:01, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">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.