Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2024 November 11

November 11

File:Elliot Rodger manifesto.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 G7 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:55, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I received this photo via FOIA request from the Santa Barbara Sheriff's office, but user Trade states that the photo doesn't fall under the public domain, and that it violates Rodger and his "estate" due to it being a typed manifesto. If it doesn't fall under PD-CAGov, then it should be deleted. Shoot for the Stars (talk) 00:07, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete this as G7. Sennecaster (Chat) 01:19, 11 November 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:Pavel Rybalko.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 ⚡ 08:04, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no information that the image was published before 1953. Also, the photo was removed from Commons and ruWiki. — Ирука¹³ 01:46, 11 November 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:Sosumi.mp3

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 2024 November 20. ✗plicit 00:37, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sosumi.mp3 (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:Grand Duke Dmitri Pavlovich of Russia.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 ⚡ 01:14, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The fact of publication has not been confirmed. — Ирука¹³ 08:40, 11 November 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.

Files by User:Nowell 1011

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. ✗plicit 23:31, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvios: clearly credited to other persons, missing their permission (compare the descriptions to claimed own works such as File:Supercat 7.jpg) -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:52, 11 November 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:Michelle Chang (Tekken).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, unused non-free file--Ymblanter (talk) 13:32, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at the official press kits and I couldn't find this particular image there. I think this image is, at best, "a cleaned up screenshot" from the game. Or, quite possibly, just fan art. Which, according to NFC, is a double copyright infringement - of the copyright holder, and of the guy who drew this art. — Ирука¹³ 23:32, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Here's the image in question, it's clearly a render with a white background the image in question is cited pretty frequently too online. What press kit archive are you looking through exactly? Also it feels like we've had this argument before, I'm almost certain of it.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 23:47, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which specific press kit did you get this image from? — Ирука¹³ 23:58, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm assuming it's such due to being listed as official promotional material, and it being in the same style as other images in other character galleries from that game. The wikia also has a disclaimer against fan based media. This wording has been considered fine for other images, I don't see why you're assuming bad faith in this instance, let alone rushing to FfD.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 00:09, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which specific press kit did you get this image from? — Ирука¹³ 00:31, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I answered your question, and modified the description to clarify it's a promotional render by the company. If you ask it again I'm going to assume you're being hostile and not trying to resolve whatever your issue is.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 00:51, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You think you answered my question. Just like you thought I assumed bad faith. I didn't. And you didn't answer. But there were bad faith - now that you've edited the file description page, we know you didn't take that image from a press kit. You lied. And now you can assume whatever you want, the question is: Where and how exactly did you get this digital image? — Ирука¹³ 01:11, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No I assumed as its labelled official promotional media it was from a press kit. That is my bad, but a mistake not a lie. Also you can clearly see the image on the page there. The image you tried to argue from the getgo was a "cleaned up screenshot" (despite being higher resolution than what's shown in the screenshots) or fan art (despite there being no indication of that), so yes, I feel that coupled with the accusatory attitude is bad faith.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:23, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, to avoid your next "mistake": Where and how exactly did you get this digital image? — Ирука¹³ 01:33, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I could link to the wikia on the rationale, but there has been past discussion indicating that such is frowned upon. Again too across a multitude of character articles, this hasn't been a problem for the images. Now perhaps instead of risking "implying" bad faith, if that's the source link you want why not simply say so?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:40, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like I'm asking a simple question... — Ирука¹³ 23:55, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The image clearly meets the WP:NFCC criteria. Demanding an exact, official source is not necessary. Honestly, the Wikia source should be fine to cite anyway. Also remember to WP:AAGF. (Oinkers42) (talk) 17:16, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Especially the fourth one. — Ирука¹³ 23:55, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment As this image is orphaned and will be deleted in lieu of a combined image for the combined Michelle and Julia Chang article, this discussion has become pretty moot.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 05:40, 20 November 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.