Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2014 August 16: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 05:46, 18 August 2014

< August 15	August 17 >

August 16

File:Radio Free Sarawak logo.jpg

Unlinked locally, PNG version available at Commons:File:Radio_Free_Sarawak_logo.png. Cube00 (talk) 03:26, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Anthology cover collage.jpg

Homemade(?) artwork using copyright material. Artwork created by someone other than the copyright holder to make a statement about an individual or individuals, and not relevant to the article. Dinkytown talk 03:55, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hearts XP.png

This was previously deleted after being nominated for deletion for the following reason: "Used against WP:NFCC#8 and WP:NFCC#3 because we already have File:Hearts 7.png." Following discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2014 August 8, the discussion is relisted because of the previously limited participation in the deletion discussion. This is a procedural nomination and I am neutral. Sandstein 10:09, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: If this file is deleted, where does the precedent end? Will we limit Wikipedia articles to a single non-free image each from here on out? Let's take a look at the unique features of this file compared to File:Hearts 7.png: the name of the software (!), the names of the default players (this is discussed quite a bit in the article, and is sourced there as well!), the dots pointing to the cards, the button (as opposed to the arrow) and message in the status bar, and of course the completely different, classic Windows styling (with the exception of the icon, which is nevertheless different from the other one), the card design actually being specially mentioned at Solitaire (Windows) - perhaps it could be mentioned at the article in question as well. Note that these features (except the icon) are also present in a number of versions of Windows older than XP; this image therefore also serves as a representation of the software as it appeared in those versions, which also means that the deletion of additional such non-free images is unlikely to be as contentious. Furthermore, the points counter in the status bar - which is a functional feature! - along with the aforementioned arrow are unique features of the other file compared to this one. As an additional point, the two versions were developed completely independently as far as I am aware (feel free to correct me on this): the XP version was made in-house at Microsoft, while the 7 version was developed by Oberon Games; I would therefore argue that these are actually two entirely separate games (which should have separate screenshots regardless of the other points I brought up above). Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 12:57, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Hi. I believe this image violates WP:NFCC, articles 1, 3 and 8 because, in comparison to the primary image (File:Hearts 7.png, also non-free) this image has very little differences. (User:Dogmaticeclectic listed them above.) As a result, this image does not significantly increase the understanding of a person who has seen File:Hearts 7.png. (Significant increase is a requirement of NFCC #8.) The minute differences between the two can be explained with words alone (hence, the violation of WP:NFCC #1) although doing so would be putting too much emphasis on intricate details that lack due weight. And, the very fact that the function of this image is almost the same as File:Hearts 7.png makes it an NFCC #3 violation. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 12:06, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The layout of a Hearts game is something not unique to MS software, and there's little discussion about how the UI looked; we allow exactly one image to be used for software to demonstrate the UI in association with the article, but all subsequent image uses must show strong contextual significance with the text, and this does not. No, it doesn't matter that they are from different versions of the software - we don't use non-free to track historical aspects of software if no one else has commented on that facet. --MASEM (t) 13:42, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Showing the history of improvements in a piece of software is a substantially important piece of encyclopedic content. Therefore images showing what older released versions looked like are strongly desirable. While the image is non-free, the fair use rationale is sound, and I see no policy-based grounds for deletion. Specifically in regardes to Codename Lisa's arguments, WP:NFCC article 1 is not violated because there are no free equivalents that illustrate the history of development of this game, article 3 is not violated because this is the only image used to illustrate that history, and 8 is not violated because it illustrates content in the article (i.e. the details of changes made between Windows XP and Windows 7) that are not illustrated by the later image. JulesH (talk) 05:46, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pat1908.jpg

Could be copied to Commons, but I don't see the point. Just a drawing from a random patent; nothing special or encyclopedic about it from what I can see. — This, that and the other (talk) 12:49, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of a number of images uploaded by the same editor and used in this edit. None are in use anymore. They may have had some use back in 2006, but none serve any purpose now. --AussieLegend (✉) 19:15, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mc at Work.jpg

This person appears to be the self-proclaimed "mascot" of the Cronulla Sharks sports team. See User:Mchammerhead. As such, the picture is somewhat unencyclopedic. — This, that and the other (talk) 12:53, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mc Hammerhead and Razorback Jack.jpg

This person appears to be the self-proclaimed "mascot" of the Cronulla Sharks sports team. See the uploader's user page. As such, the picture is somewhat unencyclopedic. — This, that and the other (talk) 12:55, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aliconazole chemical structure.png

Un-needed and unused: lower quality (CHEM MOS) than File:Aliconazole.png on commons DMacks (talk) 18:49, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Alifedrine structural formula.png

Un-needed and unused: lower quality (CHEM MOS) than File:Alifedrine.png on commons. DMacks (talk) 18:54, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Simpsons-Guy.jpg

This still fails WP:NFCC#8 - it can easily be described with words. Peter and Homer both have their own articles with images - there is no need for this one. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 18:55, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Meeting the requirements of NFCC#8 wasn't a condition of closing the last FFD. It was added as an "aside" comment by the closer. Nothing has changed since that discussion that would justify another nomination only 4 days after the last FFD was closed. --AussieLegend (✉) 19:01, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated it again because I didn't notice there were comments on the first one until it closed. I'm going to address them now - the image needs critical commentary to be justified. Right now it's just a picture of two people - and the keep votes on the first nomination are greatly overexaggerating its usefulness. It is clearly easy to picture two characters (who have articles with pictures) together. There is no justification for a fair use image that can easily be described by text. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 02:51, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You don't get to start another deletion discussion just because you didn't think to keep track of a deletion discussion that you started. Really, that's your fault for not paying attention. Your nomination then argued that it was "just a picture of two characters" but that was addressed 7 days before the discussion closed, so you had plenty of time to respond. --AussieLegend (✉) 05:03, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:50, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Zaheer Ahmed Gujjar.jpg

unused personal image uploaded by blocked sockmaster INeverCry 20:29, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:50, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Zaheer Ahmed.jpg

unused personal image uploaded by blocked sockmaster - I've deleted the version on Commons INeverCry 20:32, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:50, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
 *'''Delete'''. Hi. I believe this image violates [[WP:NFCC]], articles 1, 3 and 8 because, in comparison to the primary image ([[:File:Hearts 7.png]], also non-free) this image has very little differences. (User:Dogmaticeclectic listed them above.) As a result, this image does not '''significantly''' increase the understanding of a person who has seen File:Hearts 7.png. (Significant increase is a requirement of NFCC #8.) The minute differences between the two can be explained with words alone (hence, the violation of WP:NFCC #1) although doing so would be putting too much emphasis on intricate details that lack [[WP:DUE|due weight]]. And, the very fact that the function of this image is almost the same as File:Hearts 7.png makes it an NFCC #3 violation. Best regards, [[User:Codename Lisa|Codename Lisa]] ([[User talk:Codename Lisa|talk]]) 12:06, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
 *'''Delete''' The layout of a Hearts game is something not unique to MS software, and there's little discussion about how the UI looked; we allow exactly one image to be used for software to demonstrate the UI in association with the article, but all subsequent image uses must show strong contextual significance with the text, and this does not. No, it doesn't matter that they are from different versions of the software - we don't use non-free to track historical aspects of software if no one else has commented on that facet. --[[User:Masem|M<font size="-3">ASEM</font>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 13:42, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
+*'''Keep''' Showing the history of improvements in a piece of software is a substantially important piece of encyclopedic content.  Therefore images showing what older released versions looked like are strongly desirable.  While the image is non-free, the fair use rationale is sound, and I see no policy-based grounds for deletion.  Specifically in regardes to [[User:Codename Lisa|Codename Lisa]]'s arguments, WP:NFCC article 1 is not violated because there are no free equivalents that illustrate the history of development of this game, article 3 is not violated because this is the only image used to illustrate that history, and 8 is not violated because it illustrates content in the article (i.e. the details of changes made between Windows XP and Windows 7) that are not illustrated by the later image. [[User:JulesH|JulesH]] ([[User talk:JulesH|talk]]) 05:46, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 ====[[:File:Pat1908.jpg]]====