Jump to content

Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2024 October 21

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 21

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT 02:01, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Battle of New Orleans.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Brian.S.W (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

State license plates are not the work of the U.S. federal government and are subject to copyrights. The logo on the left is likely above the threshold of originality. Image is not used anywhere. Ixfd64 (talk) 00:24, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
File:Photo of the 2022 Andover tornado.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by WeatherWriter (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This non-free image of a tornado is being used in Tornadoes of 2022. The image is not the subject of any significant sourced critical commentary and its removal would not detract from a reader's understanding of the topic which is Tornadoes of 2022, and not this specific tornado. Fails WP:NFCC#8. Whpq (talk) 03:46, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep — It is the source of critical commentary, as the drone footage (which is what this screenshot was taken from) is the topic of several articles ([1][2][3][4][5][6]). The drone footage was also presented/used by the European Severe Storms Laboratory at the AMS 30th Conference on Severe Local Storms, where they used photogrammetry (basically near the time of this screenshot) to determine the tornado had winds up to 118.0 metres per second (264 mph). So no, this does indeed have commentary regarding this actual video/photo, which was taken by Reed Timmer, who also has their own Wikipedia article. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 03:55, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As a comment — As discussed over on the Wikimedia Commons amid a huge review of weather-related photos, photographs of tornadoes, especially notable ones with lots of lasting RS media coverage, almost always qualify under the NFF guidelines as they are historical events and photographs cannot be reproduced as that specific tornado cannot ever happen again. This idea was also confirmed by EN-Wiki administrator Rlandmann (no-pinged), who has spent months reviewing thousands of weather-related images to see if they are free to use or copyrighted. Switching tornado photos to NFFs was even recommended by Rlandmann. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 04:00, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Whpq: — Your nomination statement “the topic which is Tornadoes of 2022, and not this specific tornado” is factually incorrect. The section this NFF is used in covers the tornado outbreak of April 29–30, 2022. The topic is that outbreak of 25 tornadoes, not “Tornadoes of 2022” in general. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 04:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – I personally think it would suffice; at least in the relevant article dealing with the 2022 Andover tornado. There isn’t any known free alternatives. So I actually have to agree with @WeatherWriter (and disagree with @Whpq) on this. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 04:28, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Now that said; IF (and only if) a free alternative, even if it is at an absurdly poor resolution, were to ever become available; this image must be immediately deleted and replaced with the free one. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 04:30, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: There is a CC0 licensed photo of the damage/aftermath of the tornado; but that isn’t going to change my opinion since this deals with the tornado itself. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 04:36, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is not in an article for the 2022 Andover tornado. That is a redirect to the real article which is Tornadoes of 2022. The fact that there are no known free alternatives only means that it might satisfy WP:NFCC#1. But a non-free image must meet all of the non-free content criteria, and this image was nominated as not meeting WP:NFCC#8. None of the information in the section (not article) about the Andover tornado needs this image to be understood. -- Whpq (talk) 04:13, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And @Whpq, FYI, the link you posted for the cover. Is a redirect to “Tornadoes of 2022”. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 04:37, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Correction: supposed to ping @WeatherWriter, not the other. Wrong ping, oops!) Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 04:40, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, because it is a section on the Tornadoes of 2022 article. I interpret the sections on the article as if they are their own/unique topics, given no sections related to each other besides the shear fact they cover tornadoes that occurred during 2022. Several sections (“outbreaks”) on the Tornadoes of 2022 article have their own stand-alone articles as one section covers one unique outbreak. In this circumstance, the section linked to specifically covers that outbreak and no other tornadoes during the year 2022. To me, I do not see it as a photo for “Tornadoes of 2022”, as the Andover tornado (and subsequent outbreak) is not mentioned in any other section in the entire article, as that section is specifically for that tornado/outbreak. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 04:50, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your interpretation of sections on the article as if they are their own/unique topics is incorrect. The topic of the article is Tornadoes of 2022. -- Whpq (talk) 04:15, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: I've contacted Reed Timmer and asked if he's willing to release the image under a free license. Ixfd64 (talk) 21:16, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Update: I did not get a response from Reed Timmer, so it is assumed no permission is given. Ixfd64 (talk) 21:20, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT 16:07, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:NewsHour HD.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Melesse (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This title card is not accompanied by sufficient critical commentary and thus violates WP:NFCC#8 (contextual significance). JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 04:30, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT 01:01, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Carving of Draco Lawgiver in US Supreme Court library.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Nathan (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Several issues with the current fair use rationale:

  1. Currently it pertains only to the photograph; there is no information given about the copyright status of the carving itself
  2. Purpose of the image is given as "for visual identification of the person in question, at the top of his/her biographical article". As this is an imagined portrait not based on any ancient model and made more than two millennia after Draco's lifetime, there is no reason to believe that other depictions of Draco would in any way resemble this so it does not help substantially with identification.
  3. Rationale for being irreplaceable with free media is given as "I have been unable to find any cc-by-sa or Wikimedia-compatible photos of Draco available." However, Commons does have one (admittedly not good!) image of Draco. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 14:30, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT 01:01, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dunkin' Donuts logo.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Tkgd2007 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This former logo fails both WP:NFCC#1 (no free equivalent), as the logo can be explained with the derived wordmark c:File:Dunkin-donuts-1-logo-png-transparent.png on Commons, and WP:NFCC#8 (contextual significance), as the logo is not accompanied by sufficient critical commentary. JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 15:58, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I don't think I've ever even seen the Dunkin' Donuts logo with the coffee cup. Ixfd64 (talk) 22:08, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file'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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT 01:01, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:WS-WiiRemote Example.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Guyinblack25 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This file fails WP:NFCC#1 (no free equivalent), specifically WP:FREER. The bottom two diagrams can be replicated with freely-licensed photographs. JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 22:55, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete It also fails WP:FREER (b), which is that such a gesture can be conveyed using properly-sourced text without even using an image. Saying that someone swings the Wiimote forward in the manner of a golf club is something that most people can visualize. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 15:13, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy