Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2021 November 28

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: Procedural close/Wrong Venue. No comments for several weeks, not actionable. FfD doesn't get a lot of traffic, so difficult questions about the copyright status of specific images should be directed to Wikipedia:Media copyright questions -FASTILY 02:55, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:H.K. Fritchman House (NRHP).jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Tamanoeconomico (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Image is marked as non-free, but works from the National Park Service should in public domain unless otherwise noted. I'm pretty sure this image is not copyrighted but would appreciate a second set of eyes. Ixfd64 (talk) 19:38, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 04:25, 28 November 2021 (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.

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: relisted on 2021 December 8. FASTILY 05:08, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Fall Totally Wired.ogg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

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.

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 04:03, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tsumanuma.jpeg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Skpawlicki (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

No evidence that this photograph was released under a Creative Commons license. This may be public domain due to its age, but there isn't sufficient sourcing information to determine that. ✗plicit 05:14, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And currently nominated for deletion on Commons as well: commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tsumanuma.jpeg. - Jmabel | Talk 18:30, 28 November 2021 (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.

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 as F1 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:03, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

No licensing given for the poster and the older file was updated with a newer poster with the release date included so no need for this file to exist SP013 (talk) 06:10, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I added licensing to the poster. Reason why the old poster should be replaced with this new one is: the file name should be just "Akhanda". There is no need to disambiguate the title of the file because there is no other file with the name "Akhanda" so instead of "File:Akhanda Poster.jpg" I uploaded new poster at "File:Akhanda.jpg". Hyderabadi (talk) 07:14, 28 November 2021 (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.

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:03, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:October 22 004a.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Padamvir (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Orphaned, unidentified place. No foreseeable encyclopedic use. ✗plicit 13:09, 28 November 2021 (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.

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:03, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Polo neck.JPG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Ciarconn (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Orphaned, low quality, superseded by files at Category:Turtlenecks. ✗plicit 13:55, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 14:27, 29 November 2021 (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.

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: relisted on 2021 December 8. FASTILY 05:08, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:City of Paris logo.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

File:Logo of Paris.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

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.

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: Clear consensus to remove from London Calling, weak consensus to remove from The Guns of Brixton. No prejudice to restoration if The Guns of Brixton is significantly expanded to explicitly discuss this sample in-depth. -FASTILY 02:55, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Clash-The Guns of Brixton.ogg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by DCGeist (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Sample currently used in album article London Calling and song article The Guns of Brixton. The song "Guns of Brixton" is briefly mentioned in the album article. For usage in the album article, the sample is supposed to help readers understand what the album is about. However, the sample itself doesn't adequately help readers identify the album release, and critical commentary isn't substantial enough to justify using the sample. Furthermore, details about the song itself in the album article can be already understood (as part of the album release) without the sample. The usage may fail WP:NFCC#8 and/or WP:NFCC#1.

For usage in the song article, I'm unsure whether a sample of the song is necessary especially for identifying the song. Reading the article, a reader can already understand what the song is about without having to listen to sample. I just think there's not enough critical commentary to make the sample irreplaceable and necessary for further understanding or identification of the song. The usage may also fail WP:NFCC#8 and/or WP:NFCC#1. George Ho (talk) 09:21, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Probably makes sense to delete from the album article, but keep for the song article. I added material about the music that is illustrated by the file, and plenty more material is available that can be added. Rlendog (talk) 23:20, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 19:02, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rlendog: I recently downgraded the sample rate to 22,050 hertz and used the 16-bit PCM audio. I also trimmed out at least 11 seconds of the previous sample. Is this good enough especially for mobile users? --George Ho (talk) 04:23, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep in both song and album article (where it has 7 mentions). Nice sound file trimming and compression work again George Ho. Ceoil (talk) 22:41, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, I fail to see how such mentions in the album article suffice enough for critical commentary. AFAICS, description about the song in London Calling article is very brief and may be understood well. I also fail to see why readers will understand neither what the description about the song says nor what the article says about the whole album as much without the sample. The sample contains a verse partial and the chorus, but I also fail to see why a reader would need to hear the lyrics for what's already potentially understood. George Ho (talk) 03:05, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care enough about this band or song to do anything, so deletion is fine. Ceoil (talk) 03:07, 4 December 2021 (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.

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:03, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Back to inkblot 3.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Shadow Red The Inkling (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

No indication the depicted game is under a free license. Image is only used in user space. Ixfd64 (talk) 19:40, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, essentially orphaned (not used in the main space) with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 14:31, 29 November 2021 (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.

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:03, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:CredenzPICT.jpeg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Prathamesh8296 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Complex logo, no indication that uploader is the copyright holder. I'm not sure it qualifies for fair use because there is barely any commentary about this event. Ixfd64 (talk) 19:50, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, questionable licensing and no obvious reason why the file is useful if converted to non-free. Salavat (talk) 14:31, 29 November 2021 (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.

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: Procedural close/Wrong venue. This is an editorial matter which is better suited as a discussion on the article's talk page or on the uploader's talk page (noting that at the time of writing, no attempt has been made to contact them) -FASTILY 02:55, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:DOA - Dead or Alive (movie poster).jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Quentin_X (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Please Revert to previous version that has been used in the article without issue since 2008. No reason to believe newer image is more relevant than previous image. Image was recently changed (and page moved) without explanation. Bot keeps threatening to delete the image. 109.79.161.174 (talk) 23:28, 28 November 2021 (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.