Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2024 May 10

May 10

File:VINCE COLLETTA PAINTING BY ROMEO TANGHAL SR.jpg

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 ⚡ 13:07, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence of permission from the artist is needed. Image is not used anywhere. Ixfd64 (talk) 00:33, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here is Mr. Tanghal's email response to my asking for permission to use the painting of my father, Vince Colletta.

romeo tanghal <tanghalromeosr at yahoo.com>

Tue, May 16, 2023, 11:53 AM

to me

Hey Frankie,

Yeah, it's OK to post.

Romeo Tanghal Sr. Franklin222 (talk) 01:10, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Franklin222: Please follow the instructions at c:Commons:Volunteer Response Team and have the artist forward their correspondence to the VRT. Ixfd64 (talk) 04:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as lacking any evidence of permission. The email stated above provides no information about licensing to establish that it meets Wikipedia's licensing policy. If permission is confirmed via VRT, then the image can be undeleted then. -- Whpq (talk) 03:42, 17 May 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:Ethnic Composition of the Armed Forces in Burma, 1931.jpg

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 ⚡ 13:07, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated for speedy deletion by Battlesnake1 with the reason: "Replaced with table in the Karen conflict article". Wikiacc (¶) 01:58, 10 May 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:Aoid2.png

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 ⚡ 13:07, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Substantially similar to standard cover, no need for more non-free media. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:42, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not significantly different from the main cover artwork. hinnk (talk) 23:09, 12 May 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:Ratboys AOID alternate cassette cover.png

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. WP:NFCC#3a. Stifle (talk) 11:09, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Substantially similar to standard cover, no need for more non-free media. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:42, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For this file and the one above, am I right in thinking that from the non-free content criteria (WP:NFCCP), the one that would be violated here is 3a: "Multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information"? Or 8: "Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic"?

(I am uploader of the files, but I'm trying to be unbiased here - I am new and still learning!) GanzKnusper (talk) 08:52, 10 May 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:TresHanley2007.jpg

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 ⚡ 13:07, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan image, article where the image was used, was deleted recently: (WP:Articles for deletion/Trés Hanley). Delete per WP:NOTFILESTORAGE. Mika1h (talk) 09:16, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Commons per c:COM:EDUSE. —Matrix(!) {user - talk? - _uselesscontributions} 15:46, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unused photo of a non-notable individual, dubious copyright status (uploaded by a SPA intent on promoting Ms. Hanley). Should not be transferred to commons, it would run afoul of c:COM:SCOPE -Fastily 06:19, 17 May 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:Camila Cabello - C,XOXO.jpg

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. Ixfd64 (talk) 19:10, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:NFCC#3a, the main cover File:Camila Cabello - C,XOXO.png conveys equivalent significant information pertaining to C,XOXO. And, per #8 of the same policy, the inclusion of this artwork will not significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would not be detrimental to that understanding. livelikemusic (TALK!) 15:46, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously no. The main cover doesn't covery equivalent significant information pertaining to C,XOXO because the latter one was made available for multiple significant retailers like HMV and Target, which means the first part of your opinion doesn't make sense. The inclusion of alternative covers for Guts and Sour proved it's necessary to let it be there, and not to remove it. Moreover, the alternative cover contains the title C,XOXO with the new font this era used everywhere, which is also the brand of this album, which means it's necessary to leave this alternative cover alone and not to remove it. In fact, the inclusion of this artwork will significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding, definitely. H9v9n9 (talk) 16:33, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not widely distributed. Neither the existence of Target exclusive nor the branding features described by H9v9n9 are ever mentioned in the article. hinnk (talk) 23:13, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Why would Guts by Olivia Rodrigo get to keep her Target edition but Camilla doesn't? Camillas covers are completely different from eachother, not just changed to a different color. Some people on here are just bitter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.244.52.160 (talk) 17:10, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's a reason to delete the other image, not keep this one. Stifle (talk) 13:25, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:NFCC#3a. Stifle (talk) 13:25, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the alternate cover is not the subject of any significant sourced commentary and is only being used for visual identification and as such fails WP:NFCC#3a. -- Whpq (talk) 03:52, 17 May 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:Ooh Aah... Just a Little Bit 2.jpg

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, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extraneous cover art: fails WP:NFCC#3a and/or WP:NFCC#8. Other cover art already used. George Ho (talk) 23:37, 10 May 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.