- 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. (OTRS ref:
ticket:2020072910008656) —
JJMC89 (
T·
C)
04:45, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
reply
-
File:The Arrow of Time artwork.jpg (
delete |
talk |
history |
links |
logs) – uploaded by
Gerald Waldo Luis (
notify |
contribs |
uploads |
upload log).
Non-free album cover being used in a decorative manner in
Timelapse of the Future#Soundtrack. Non-free album cover art is generally allowed to be used for primary identification purposes in stand-alone articles about albums, but its use in other articles is generally only allowed when the cover art itself is the subject of sourced critical commentary as explained in
WP:NFC#cite_note-3 and the
context for non-free use required by
WP:NFCC#8 is evident. There is no such commentary for this particular album cover anywhere in the article, and the use of soundtrack album cover art in articles about films or TV programs is generally not allowed for this reason as explained in
WP:FILMSCORE and
MOS:TVPRODUCTION. There are also issues per
WP:NFCC#3a since the cover art appears to be basically the same image as
File:Timelapse of the Future thumbnail.jpg being used for primary identification in the main infobox with the only real difference being the text over the image.
This file was prodded for deletion, but deprodded with
this edit. While it's true that some information about the cover art has been added to the caption, it's completely unsourced and thus is pretty much nothing but
WP:OR. What is needed is for critical commentary about the album's cover to be added to the body of the article supported by citations to reliable sources which were discussing the cover and it's significance. Simply claiming that the cover art's creator used a different type of font than usual for wording on the cover is not something that actual requires seeing the cover to understand per NFCC#1 or NFCC#8. A statement saying that the "texts in the center of it is in serif, differing it from any other works Boswell has done, in which they are used in sans serif." can be sufficiently understood. Text and fonts are not copyrightable elements and such a difference can be expressed in ways other than showing the cover art itself.
The same file was uploaded to Commons as
File:The Arrow of Time.jpg, but then reuploaded locally to Wikipedia as non-free content. There was some discussion at
User talk:Gerald Waldo Luis#Proposed deletion of File:The Arrow of Time artwork.jpg about the file's non-free use and why it was prodded for deletion. In that discussion, there was some mention of the copyright holder giving their
WP:CONSENT for the file. If that can be OTRS verified, then the file would no longer be subject to
WP:NFCC and could be used in the article regardless of whether there's sourced critical commentary about it. --
Marchjuly (
talk)
09:55, 26 July 2020 (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.