Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2014 March 21

< March 20	March 22 >

March 21

File:Zedd - Clarity (Deluxe).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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This file fails WP:NFCC#3a because the article (Clarity (Zedd album)) has another unfree file in the infobox (File:Zedd - Clarity (album).png). The file also fails WP:NFCC#8 because there is no critical commentary that requires the presence of this file. Green Giant supports NonFreeWiki (talk) 01:16, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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:Zaman cover 2 d.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This file fails WP:NFCC#3a because the article it is used in, (Zaman (album)), already has another unfree file in the infobox (File:Zaman (Amal Hijazi album).jpg). The file also fails WP:NFCC#8 because there is no critical commentary that requires the presence of this image. Green Giant supports NonFreeWiki (talk) 02:00, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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:Power 106 Albuquerque.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: Kept as a free logo - Peripitus (Talk) 12:15, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This file fails WP:NFCC#3a because the article (KDLW) has another unfree file in the infobox (File:Z106.3 logo.gif). The file also fails #8 because there is no critical commentary that requires the presence of this logo. Green Giant supports NonFreeWiki (talk) 03:42, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. As this logo only consists of simple text and shapes, it does not meet the Threshold of originality for copyright. Therefore, neither WP:NFCC#3a nor WP:NFCC#8 apply.Buffalutheran (talk) 01:53, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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:Yugandataiyo vinyl.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This file fails WP:NFCC#3a because the article it is used in, Yuganda Taiyō, has another unfree file in the infobox, File:Yugandataiyo.jpg. The file also fails NFCC#8 because there is no critical commentary that requires the presence of this image. Green Giant supports NonFreeWiki (talk) 05:19, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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:Yui Aragaki - Niji (Limited A).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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This file fails WP:NFCC#3a because it is one of three unfree files used in Niji (album) where only one is needed. The file also fails NFCC#8 because there is no critical commentary that requires the presence of this image. Green Giant supports NonFreeWiki (talk) 05:24, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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:Yui Aragaki - Niji (Limited B).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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This file fails WP:NFCC#3a because it is one of three unfree files used in Niji (album) where only one is needed. The file also fails NFCC#8 because there is no critical commentary that requires the presence of this image. Green Giant supports NonFreeWiki (talk) 05:25, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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:Yui Aragaki - Akai Ito (Limited).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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This file fails WP:NFCC#3a because it is one of two unfree files used in Akai Ito (song) where only one is needed. The file also fails NFCC#8 because there is no critical commentary that requires the presence of this image. Green Giant supports NonFreeWiki (talk) 05:28, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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:YUIagainlimited.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This file fails WP:NFCC#3a because it is one of two unfree files used in Again (Yui song) where only one is needed. The file also fails NFCC#8 because there is no critical commentary that requires the presence of this image. Green Giant supports NonFreeWiki (talk) 05:31, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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:YUI-CBMLWS.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This file fails WP:NFCC#3a because it is one of three unfree files used in Can't Buy My Love where only one is needed. The file also fails NFCC#8 because there is no critical commentary that requires the presence of this image. Green Giant supports NonFreeWiki (talk) 05:48, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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:YUI-CBMLl.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This file fails WP:NFCC#3a because it is one of three unfree files used in Can't Buy My Love where only one is needed. The file also fails NFCC#8 because there is no critical commentary that requires the presence of this image. Green Giant supports NonFreeWiki (talk) 05:49, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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:Yui Horie - sky (limited edition).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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This file fails WP:NFCC#3a because it is one of three unfree files used in Sky (Yui Horie album) where only one is needed. The file also fails NFCC#8 because there is no critical commentary that requires the presence of this image. Green Giant supports NonFreeWiki (talk) 05:53, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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:Yui its all too much single.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This file fails WP:NFCC#3a because it is one of two unfree files in It's All Too Much/Never Say Die where only one is needed. The file also fails WP:NFCC#8 because there is no critical commentary which requires the presence of the image. Green Giant supports NonFreeWiki (talk) 06:00, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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:Zuo Ci.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This file fails WP:NFCC#8 because it is used solely to illustrate a single sentence about a character from a game, without any critical commentary. Green Giant supports NonFreeWiki (talk) 15:57, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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:Zumba-he-zumba-ha-2012remix-alternative.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: Deleted as failing to pass WP:NFCC#8 in that this additional image does not significantly increase reader's understanding of the article - Peripitus (Talk) 12:20, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This file fails WP:NFCC#3a because it is one of three unfree files in Zumba He Zumba Ha, where only one image is really needed. The file also fails WP:NFCC#8 because there is no critical commentary that requires the presence of this image beyond a brief mention. Green Giant supports NonFreeWiki (talk) 16:05, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Each of these is an independent single in its own right. They were released in different years, one in 2011 and one in 2012, the performers are different (one features Soldat Jahman, the other Jessy Matador, although Luis Guisao is common in both releases), the singles pertaining to each have been hits separately in various countries (the original single charted separately reaching position 192 in France (See http://lescharts.com/showitem.asp?interpret=DJ+Mam%27s+feat%2E+Soldat+Jahman+%26+Luis+Guisao&titel=Zumba+he+zumba+ha&cat=s) the second reaching position 7 in France and being also a hit in Belgium. See http://lescharts.com/showitem.asp?interpret=DJ+Mam%27s+feat%2E+Jessy+Matador+%26+Luis+Guisao+&titel=Zumba+he+Zumba+ha+%5BRemix+2012%5D&cat=s ). A brief look at the music videos will also make this clear. The original single whose cover File:Zumba-he-zumba-ha-1.jpg will stay is this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjH5xGplPvM ... Whereas the file being proposed for deletion here, namely File:Zumba-he-zumba-ha-2012remix-alternative.jpg is a 2012 release that was performed by an altogether new artist Jessy Matador and pertains to this release. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGLCESkr9cM Please also note the cover of the single you are proposing to delete was a far bigger hit than the one you are proposing to keep which is strange (position 7 for the one being deleted versus position #192 for the original in France which you propose to keep). So proposal to delete what are effectively two COMPLETELY DIFFERENT releases is not merited. werldwayd (talk) 19:03, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Having watched both videos and listened to both versions, I cannot see the argument that they are completely different. I am not going to pretend to understand every word and I don't have a special ear for music but on first impression the only significant difference appears to be that Jahman's voice is deeper than Matador's and that Matador seems to dance a bit more than Jahman. There are some differences in the lyrics and the music but nothing dramatic enough to say that they are completely different. Guisao's contribution to both versions appears to be pretty much the same. The videos involve different sets of background people in different locations but both versions have them dancing in pretty much the same style, which is obviously going to happen. However, your argument for keeping this file does not explain why we need the image, when the specific section has just two sentences explaining that it was released in 2012 and had some success in France and the Walloon part of Belgium. I think it also comes down to a question of whether the Matador remix is notable enough to have a separate article? If so, then i could see an argument for keeping this image. If not, you will need to have some significant discussion about it in the article, certainly more than the two brief sentences it has at the moment:

In 2012, a new remix version ~~of "Zumba he, Zumba ha" was released in collaboration with Jessy Matador. The single "Zumba he, Zumba ha (Remix 2012)" credited to DJ Mam's~~ featuring Jessy Matador & Luis Guisano became a major hit in France in June 2012 reaching #7 in SNEP 100.

A major part of these sentences is unnecessary padding and the prose could be summed up as:

In 2012, a new remix version, featuring Jessy Matador and Luis Guisano, became a major hit in France in June 2012 reaching #7 in SNEP 100.

How does the inclusion of the image meet WP:NFCC#8? Green Giant supports NonFreeWiki (talk) 12:08, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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:Zumba-he-zumba-ha-2.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This file fails WP:NFCC#3a because it is one of three unfree files in Zumba He Zumba Ha, where only one image is really needed. The file also fails WP:NFCC#8 because there is no critical commentary that requires the presence of this image beyond a brief mention. Green Giant supports NonFreeWiki (talk) 16:06, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have no opposition to delete this file. One original cover for the Jessy Matador version is enough. This can go. However I am arguing for the other image File:Zumba-he-zumba-ha-2012remix-alternative.jpg to be kept. See separate discussion on that image's discussion page. werldwayd (talk) 19:05, 21 March 2014 (UTC) werldwayd (talk) 19:07, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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:Rocket Khan al Asal.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free photograph of rocket debris allegedly used in a chemical weapons attack in Syria. FUR makes it clear that it is being used with an intended WP:OR purpose: it is meant to invite the reader to "identify or rule out the rocket type used in the attack" and so on. This is problematic: first, it is unsourced OR (if the image has in fact been used to support some argument about the nature of the rocket, then we need to cite a reliable source that describes this argument.) Second, even if such an argument could be sourced, we would likely have a WP:NFCC#8 failure, because the argument could be easily understood from text alone, and the image would do little or nothing to help the non-expert reader appreciate it. How many of our readers have the technical expertise to recognize the type of a rocket from a picture of a dislodged shard of metal? If an expert told us that this picture proves that the rocket was of such-and-such a kind, how many of our readers would be able to judge for themselves if that argument is sound? Just cite that expert and be done with it. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:21, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The purpose is to show remains of the rocket used. No free equivalent is known to exist. As an image of a historical event, no new media could be created that would convey the same information. Erlbaeko (talk) 21:31, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You ignored my point. What "same information" are you talking about? What useful information is it that the image conveys that couldn't be conveyed otherwise? The rocket involved some metal sheets, that's all I can gather from it. Wow, big deal. Anything that goes beyond this is, as I just showed, unsourced WP:OR. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:27, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you compare the two images (File:Rocket Khan al Asal.jpg with File:Impact point Khan al Asal.jpg), you will see that they are taken at the same position (notice the S-shaped rock). Four days later, A Russian investigation team took metal fragments and soil samples at the site (ref page 31 in this UN report (https://unoda-web.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/report.pdf)). Later that day a photographer from Reuters was shown the site. The images taken by the Reuters photographer shows clearly the same place, (http://asset1.skynewsarabia.com/web/images/2013/04/07/176143/598/337/1-176143.jpg) and the area around (http://s1.reutersmedia.net/resources/r/?m=02&d=20130709&t=2&i=749075392&w=580&fh=&fw=&ll=&pl=&r=CBRE96819ZP00). If you compare all four images, you will see that they all come from the site the UN has marked in its report (page 29) as the “alleged place of release” (36°10′2″N 37°2′21″E / 36.16722°N 37.03917°E). This information can only be revealed from the images in question. I have, however, removed the image from the infobox (know you don't like those infoboxes ;) Erlbaeko (talk) 11:23, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"If you compare the two images..."? That is exactly the OR speculation I'm talking about. We are not supposed to be inviting our readers to draw their own conclusions from comparing images. And what would these conclusions be anyway? (In actual fact, no, I can't even verify that these images all show the same spot, but either way, that is completely irrelevant. The article doesn't indicate that the location of the spot where the rocket landed was disputed or anything, so why would I care about what the rocks around it looked like?) The information that somebody took soil and metal samples from there does not make the image any more relevant either. I can't see those soil samples in the image, and even if I could, the image would tell me nothing about what was found in them. If the experts said they found such-and-such in these samples, just cite a reliable source about it; the image adds absolutely nothing to the understanding of that. The only thing the image shows me is the absolutely trivial information that it landed somewhere (big surprise!), and that something on the ground got charred. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:39, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I disagree. The images are clearly from the impact site, and they document an important part of the incident. Erlbaeko (talk) 11:57, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"They are clearly from the impact site"? Sure, I have no reasons to suppose they aren't, but so what? They "document an important part of the incident"? Maybe they do to the expert who is actually tasked with finding out what was in the soil at that point, and with verifying that the soil samples were taken from the right spot. But that is the expert's task, and not ours. We neither can make such a check, nor should we be trying to. To the Wikipedia reader, these images are nothing beyond a random piece of charred soil and a random shred of metal sheet, and showing them creates nothing but an illusion of being any the wiser by seeing them. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:02, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see it as original research. It is photos taken at the location the UN have marked in its investigation report as "the impact point". The research has been done by the UN and russian expert's (ref http://rt.com/news/syria-chemical-attack-rebels-848/). Erlbaeko (talk) 13:54, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - this image adds very little to readers understanding of the subject matter. There are plenty of other images that could be used to illustrate the article. As Fut. Perf. correctly points out, the fair use rationale appears to be orientated to investigation of the event, using phrases like "to identify or rule out the rocket type used in the attack; compared with other images takes at the site to estimate the size of the rocket". Such usages would be original research. Green Giant supports NonFreeWiki (talk) 19:30, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the images can be used in original research, but the images itself is not. If the image text is the problem, I can change the purpose text to something like. "To show the remains of the rocket used in the Khan al-Asal attack". That is equival to the purpose used to ilustrate the symptoms in the Ghouta chemical attack artickle (File:Hrw froth.PNG). Erlbaeko (talk) 09:15, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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:YUIlimited.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This file fails WP:NFCC#3a because the article, Gloria (Yui song), already has another unfree file in the infobox, File:YUIregular.jpg. Green Giant supports NonFreeWiki (talk) 23:28, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.