Wikipedia:files For Discussion 2023 December 13

December 13

File:Get out of jail free.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 Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:06, 21 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Replaceable with c:File:Monopoly - Get Out of Jail Free Chance card (2008).jpg and/or c:File:Monopoly - Get Out of Jail Free Community Chest card (2008).jpg on Commons per WP:NFCC#1. JohnCWiesenthal ( talk) 00:13, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Keep because I disagree on the replace-ability here. The card in the popular imagination, and in most versions of the game of Monopoly, is the currently-used file. Search on Google Images; the vast majority of results will be for variations of this card or the one in the same game from Community Chest. Elli ( talk | contribs) 00:36, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Delete The article does not backup the claim that this version is distinctive enough to be notable over the modern version. It's the concept of a "get out of jail free" card that is notable. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 12:34, 17 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Delete The old one is not necessary and we have a free replacement. ~ F4U ( talk • they/it) 17:10, 19 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Delete. I understand the argument for keeping, but since the Commons file is an official version, I think that replaceability applies here. Thriftycat ^{Talk •
Contribs} 19:04, 19 December 2023 (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:Blondin & Cirage-comics series.svg

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) 23:04, 20 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Source where image is taken from is a copyright-violating repository of downloads of illegal pdf copies of copyrighted comics Fram ( talk) 19:26, 5 December 2023 (UTC) reply

hello, so are there any options to make this .svg legal? The image itself was retrieved from the content of one of the series comic books. Haggis MacHaggis ( talk) 19:58, 7 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fastily 03:08, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply

@ Haggis MacHaggis: According to WP:LINKVIO, the image would probably need a source that does not violate copyright. This would mean that the website would need to either be authorized by the copyright holder or covered under fair use. Thriftycat ^{Talk •
Contribs} 13:18, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete, it seems that there's no legal source for this file. Thriftycat ^{Talk •
Contribs} 19:06, 19 December 2023 (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:Les-levres-rouges.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: No consensus - Fastily 08:55, 21 December 2023 (UTC) reply

There's equivalent free media in this article in the form of File:Del Mar Theatre Ad - 24 September 1971, Santa Cruz, CA.jpg. ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 03:46, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply

per the infobox standards, we use film posters, not trade or newspaper ads to identify the film. Andrzejbanas ( talk) 04:57, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply

In my opinion, WP:NFCC1 (a policy with legal considerations) should take precedence over the guideline on infoboxes. While it may be monochrome and lower quality, the free alternative still helps the reader to understand the film, so there should be no non-free content used for similar purposes. Therefore, I recommend ~~delete~~. Thriftycat ^{Talk •
Contribs} 13:04, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Its not an equivalent as the terms on MOS:FILM state that the film poster is arguably the easiest way to identify a film. Having a Belgian film identified by a cheap muddy newspaper ad is not. I'd honestly rather having nothing over the newspaper clip. Andrzejbanas ( talk) 14:25, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply
I definitely agree that the newspaper clip is very poor quality. I just wasn't sure that the gap between the files was large enough to justify the irreplaceability of the image. Thriftycat ^{Talk •
Contribs} 04:13, 14 December 2023 (UTC) reply

I withdrew my !vote per the comments of Betty Logan and others because I don't think that I have an adequate understanding of the historical copyright notice requirements. Thriftycat ^{Talk •
Contribs} 21:43, 14 December 2023 (UTC) reply
The purpose of the posters is for identifiability, a cheap newspaper scan is not equivalent for purpose. Darkwarriorblake ( talk) 14:35, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Keep per Darkwarriorblake and WP:FILMPOSTER. InfiniteNexus ( talk) 06:45, 14 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Keep I agree with DWB and Andrzejbanas, that using the official poster serves a very specific identification purpose on film articles. I am also dubious that the newspaper ad is in the PD, if the original poster is not, given that it is clearly a derivative work. If the original poster is still under copyright, then the derivative IP in the newspaper ad would still be under copyright too (similar to how It's a Wonderful Life is technically in the public domain, but is protected by the copyright of the book it is based on).

Betty Logan ( talk) 09:00, 14 December 2023 (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:Chansey Fukushima Manhole.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 Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:06, 21 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The article already has an image of Chansey. I don't think this image is necessary enough to the article to qualify as valid non-free use. ~WikiOriginal-9~ ( talk) 08:01, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete Fails WP:NFCC3 as excessive use of non-free files. The infobox picture is enough for the reader to understand the visuals of the character. Thriftycat ^{Talk •
Contribs} 12:49, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Keep per rationales outlined on the file talk page. This image demonstrates the significant promotion and role of Chansey as an "ambassador Pokémon" in the Fukushima prefecture. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 ( talk) 14:48, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete Not sure there is "no free equivalent" here. One could technically go to Japan and take a free image of the Chansey outfit or the manhole so it's not a similar situation as a Pokemon's drawn artwork. This applies even though Chansey is a copyrighted design, per WP:FREER. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 12:31, 17 December 2023 (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:Tilak Scoring a Century for Mumbai Indians.jpeg

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) 23:04, 20 December 2023 (UTC) reply

This image is a work of digital art (someone's face was pasted on someone else's body) that I can't see an educational purpose for. Additionally, it may be a copyright violation as no sources for the photos are given. The Quirky Kitty ( talk) 08:20, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete, no foreseeable use for this file. Thriftycat ^{Talk •
Contribs} 12:54, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Also, note that the uploader repeatedly used the image to vandalise Tilak Varma. Thriftycat ^{Talk •
Contribs} 13:33, 13 December 2023 (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:Jerry Brudos Arrested Salem Oregon June 1969.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 as F7 by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:00, 16 December 2023 (UTC) reply

There is already an arguably better non-free image in the article ( File:Brudos j.jpg). ~WikiOriginal-9~ ( talk) 13:11, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete The file in question is now an orphan as a free version exists. The image should be removed.-- Kieronoldham ( talk) 14:34, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Tagged as WP:F7 Thriftycat ^{Talk •
Contribs} 18:23, 13 December 2023 (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:Big Bet (TV series).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) 23:05, 20 December 2023 (UTC) reply

WP:NFCCP #3a & #8 ♒️ 98TIGERIUS 🐯 14:33, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete. Non-free use rationale claims it is to be used only in the infobox. Thriftycat ^{Talk •
Contribs} 17:56, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete since it fails both WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8. Aspects ( talk) 01:01, 14 December 2023 (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:The First Responders.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) 23:05, 20 December 2023 (UTC) reply

WP:NFCCP #3a & #8 ♒️ 98TIGERIUS 🐯 14:41, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete since it fails both WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8. Aspects ( talk) 01:01, 14 December 2023 (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:The Guardian al-Qaeda recruitment.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) 23:05, 20 December 2023 (UTC) reply

I am not seeing how this image meets WP:NFCC8. The Guardian is not being discussed in the article ( Al-Qaeda), and even if it were I fail to see why a quote would not suffice. House Blaster^talk 21:03, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete. It just seems like a strange way to cite a source. Nothing relevant even to general media coverage is commented on in the section where the content appears. The stated rationale of "historical context" is not inherently valid, anyway. Thriftycat ^{Talk •
Contribs} 21:54, 13 December 2023 (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:Geddesburg (Ann Arbor) historic marker.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 Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:06, 21 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Per c:COM:FOP US, freedom of panorama only extends to buildings. There is no evidence to suggest that the text is freely licensed. As c:COM:CB#Noticeboards and signs states, "detailed informational and educational noticeboards/signs [...] are almost always copyright-protected". ✗ plicit 23:44, 13 December 2023 (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:DonorBox screenshot.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: relisted on 2023 December 21. Fastily 08:56, 21 December 2023 (UTC) reply

File:DonorBox screenshot.png ( delete | talk | history | links | logs)

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:Saline, Michigan (salt springs) MSHS marker.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 Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:06, 21 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Per c:COM:FOP US, freedom of panorama only extends to buildings. There is no evidence to suggest that the text is freely licensed. As c:COM:CB#Noticeboards and signs states, "detailed informational and educational noticeboards/signs [...] are almost always copyright-protected". ✗ plicit 23:49, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Comment. It is a Michigan state historic marker. There are hundreds of photos of similar markers on Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons, and the markers are public state property and commissioned by the state government. Not sure what the copyright issue would be. — Notorious4life ( talk) 02:39, 14 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete. Unfortunately, the government of Michigan seems to hold copyright on most of its work. This Harvard website states that work by Michigan gov't should be presumed copyrighted, and "the text on an official Michigan historical marker" is an explicit example given as copyrighted work. (this is not legal advice) Thriftycat ^{Talk •
Contribs} 03:04, 14 December 2023 (UTC) reply

There are lots of similar images of historical markers on List of Michigan State Historic Sites in Washtenaw County, and other pages, I'm sure. They may have to be deleted as well, depending on the outcome of this discussion. Thriftycat ^{Talk •
Contribs} 03:08, 14 December 2023 (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:Saline, Michigan MSHS marker.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 Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:06, 21 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Per c:COM:FOP US, freedom of panorama only extends to buildings. There is no evidence to suggest that the text is freely licensed. As c:COM:CB#Noticeboards and signs states, "detailed informational and educational noticeboards/signs [...] are almost always copyright-protected". ✗ plicit 23:50, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Comment. (Same as the discussion above, File:Saline, Michigan (salt springs) MSHS marker.jpg) It is a Michigan state historic marker. There are hundreds of photos of similar markers on Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons, and the markers are public state property and commissioned by the state government. Not sure what the copyright issue would be. — Notorious4life ( talk) 02:39, 14 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete, per my comment above. Thriftycat ^{Talk •
Contribs} 03:05, 14 December 2023 (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.