Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2023 January 27

< January 26	January 28 >

January 27

File:Flm 2003 B.jpg

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. Ixfd64 (talk) 07:05, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Derivative work, permission required. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 06:22, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 07:00, 28 January 2023 (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.

File:Flm2003 A.jpg

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. Ixfd64 (talk) 07:05, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Derivative work, permission required. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 06:22, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 07:00, 28 January 2023 (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.

File:Jeanne-Calment-1996.jpg

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:42, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We don't require a non-free image of her, when multiple free images of her in earlier life exist. Fails WP:NFCC#1 as there are other free photos of her, and WP:NFCC#8 as the image doesn't significantly enhance the reader's understanding of the article. Same reasoning as at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2023 January 19#File:LucileRandon2019.webp, which was deleted for these reasons Joseph2302 (talk) 16:46, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - image is essential to identify the subject and to show the great age reached by her. Images of her in her youth do not have the same visual impact. Jack1956 (talk) 17:31, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2023 January 19#File:LucileRandon2019.webp. Ixfd64 (talk) 18:20, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Jack1956. Readers will want to know what the subject looked like at her great age 92.2.219.237 (talk) 18:57, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Jack1956. She is the oldest person in history, so notable. However, I wish there were more copyright-free images. --Ayuta Tonomura (talk) 09:30, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Ixfd64, as we already have a similar precedent in FFD. Unless there are new reasons to overturn, the conclusions stated in the previous discussion also applies to this file.廣九直通車 (talk) 04:52, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - important image showing the great age of the lady. More important than the other images in the article showing her as a younger woman. 88.111.150.43 (talk) 21:45, 31 January 2023 (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.

File:Kane Tanaka 117.webp

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 F7 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We don't require a non-free image of her, when multiple free images of her in earlier life exist. Fails WP:NFCC#1 as there are other free photos of her, and WP:NFCC#8 as the image doesn't significantly enhance the reader's understanding of the article. Same reasoning as at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2023 January 19#File:LucileRandon2019.webp, which was deleted for these reasons Joseph2302 (talk) 16:47, 27 January 2023 (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.

File:SarahKnauss1979.jpg

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:43, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We don't require a non-free image of her, when multiple free images of her in earlier life exist. Fails WP:NFCC#1 as there are other free photos of her, and WP:NFCC#8 as the image doesn't significantly enhance the reader's understanding of the article. Same reasoning as at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2023 January 19#File:LucileRandon2019.webp, which was deleted for these reasons Joseph2302 (talk) 16:48, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Was this photograph published with a copyright notice, or did the author register for copyright within five years? If the answer to both questions is no, then this photo would be in public domain. Ixfd64 (talk) 00:04, 31 January 2023 (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.

File:10 Squadron RAF.jpg

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, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Crown copyright has long expired. Replaced with File:No. 10 Squadron RAF badge.png on Commons and no longer used. Ixfd64 (talk) 18:13, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, redundant to Commons file. Salavat (talk) 07:01, 28 January 2023 (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.

File:Big Brother 16 (U.S.) Logo.png

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, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Previously nominated due to (mis)use in multiple articles. This time, I believe this title card doesn't clearly help readers understand Big Brother 16 (American season). In other words, despite being allowed by MOS:TVIMAGE, it may not be proven contextually significant, despite using different graphics and colors for the logo and different background. Furthermore, the image neither says "16" nor shows a cast photo on the background, like the lead image of Big Brother 15 (American season). George Ho (talk) 21:39, 27 January 2023 (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.

File:11 Squadron RAF.jpg

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, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Crown copyright has long expired. Replaced with File:No. 11 Squadron RAF badge.png on Commons and no longer used. Ixfd64 (talk) 22:33, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, redundant to Commons file. Salavat (talk) 07:02, 28 January 2023 (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.

File:Marie-Louise Meilleur, 1998.jpg

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 2023 February 7. Whpq (talk) 00:24, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Marie-Louise Meilleur, 1998.jpg (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.