Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2024 June 10

June 10

File:Amaravati Government complex.jpg

Fails WP:NFCCP#1 pretty easy to have a free version. — DaxServer (t·m·e·c) 08:11, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The rationale's explanations on WP:NFCC#1 and WP:NFCC#8 are both incorrect. Even if it were irreplaceable, the article is about the city and not this complex. hinnk (talk) 08:45, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The image is a poor-quality image given an unduly prominent part of a montage in the infobox of the article on the city of Amaravati. The montage would look much better without it. The rationale given at File:Amaravati Government complex.jpg says that the article as a whole is dedicated specifically to a discussion of this work. That is not true. It also claims that the image is not replaceable - but since the buildings still exist, there is nothing to stop the uploader getting a camera and taking their own photographs of the buildings.-- Toddy1 (talk) 09:35, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Always remember us single.jpg

Originally nominated by Sricsi (talk · contribs) in an AfD nomination, despite this being a file and not an article. Their rationale follows:

Fan-made album cover, serves no purpose

This is largely procedural on my part; I offer no opinion or further comment. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I had uploaded the cover for the Always Remember Us This Way article, but it was removed by @GagaNutella: stating that "it was not the official cover" for the single (see edit summary).

I'm not able to discuss about that point so I can't state whether this is true or not. Probably other users give us more info about this topic. Nothing more from my part, thank you. Fma12 (talk) 15:24, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The upload was sourced from a Lady Gaga fan Twitter account, and I can find no evidence of it existing in official sources. No single release on Spotify, Apple Music, or Tidal. A Star Is Born (2018 soundtrack) says it was a radio-only single in Europe, and I doubt it would have unique cover art in that case. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 16:11, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:BTS - Idol (from Love Yourself - Answer).ogg

This non-free audio file samples ~13% of a copyrighted musical recording, in violation of both WP:NFCC#3b (minimal extent of use) and WP:SAMPLE. JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 14:52, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and tag as {{non-free reduce}}. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 16:14, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete this audio file as some people need it to hear the song and hear the instruments that were mentioned under "composition". Just because you think it's an example of illiteracy doesn't mean it is, people really do need it. 41.114.190.152 (talk) 14:05, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep 41.114.190.152 (talk) 14:06, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Not solely on length. The assumption that readers won't understand one of the Korean songs without this sample ~~screams assumption of illiteracy, IMO.~~ Reading the article, readers would already figure out it's a Korean song, and uses of music from other cultures would be already understood, even when description about the whole music within the "Composition" section is brief yet concise.
Compare samples to screenshots: they still need to contextually signify respective topics in question. If omitting this sample doesn't impact the understanding of the song, then the sample may not be contextually significant after all. George Ho (talk) 20:01, 12 June 2024 (UTC); edited, 16:16, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your comment is very insensitive because you cannot assume that one is illiterate only off of a song sample.

I say keep 41.114.190.152 (talk) 14:09, 13 June 2024 (UTC) Double vote by editor using this IP (41.114.190.152). George Ho (talk) 18:20, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:MegalovaniaShort.ogg

This non-free audio file samples ~16% of a copyrighted musical recording, in violation of both WP:NFCC#3b (minimal extent of use) and WP:SAMPLE. JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 14:59, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I uploaded this audio file before I knew about WP:SAMPLE. I'll upload a reduced version (which should be about 0:15 seconds, since the Undertale version is half a minute longer than the original recording) when I get home. P.S. this file clearly has a purpose, and should not have been listed for deletion. λ NegativeMP1 15:15, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If I may, the above assertion regarding the length per WP:SAMPLE is based on the time in the infobox, which is the duration of the original version. The version illustrated from Undertale is [[1]] is 2 minutes 36 seconds in length (additionally verified by the wikia here short of ripping it from the OST itself). Would it be viable to use a 23 second clip with this in consideration, so it can go past the opening section?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:21, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and tag as {{non-free reduce}}. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 16:14, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and reduce length per Kung Fu Man, preferably with a sourced caption added in the article to increase the sample's viability under criterion 8 of the NFCC. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:23, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 01:24, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who is above though? 39.50.245.89 (talk) 12:54, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Remove from Sans (Undertale). The sample might or might not enhance readers' understanding of a video game character, but I'm unconvinced that omitting it from the character article would impact such understanding, especially now that the instrumental itself has its own article. Furthermore, there's already a character image as the lead image. Why is the sample needed other than some mere character association? (Even I don't see why a sample of the Super Mario Bros. theme should be used in the Mario article.) George Ho (talk) 20:12, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Remove from Sans (Undertale). Upon careful examination, I fail to identify any logical justification or significant purpose for the inclusion of this particular file within the context of the article. Moreover, its presence could potentially be perceived as a violation of the Wikipedia guideline on trivial content, commonly referred to as WP:Fancruft. It is worth noting that in the age of easily accessible online platforms like YouTube, where users can readily listen to the song in question, the necessity of embedding this file becomes increasingly questionable. From the perspective of maintaining a high standard of encyclopedic quality, the file in question may not offer substantial value to the general readership but rather be considered extraneous information or "cruft" in this context. Consequently, given its limited relevance and potential diversion from the primary objective of delivering informative and educational content, a strong case can be made for the removal of this file from the article to enhance the overall reader experience and uphold the integrity of the information presented. 39.50.245.89 (talk) 12:51, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kinunot na Isdang Tuna1.jpg

Better image is File:Kinunot na Isdang Tuna2.jpg. Instance of use here now replaced. This inferior version of the image of the dish can be deleted as unused and WP:NOTFILESTORAGE. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 23:57, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Transfer to Commons If rotated and cropped, this is of comparable quality. hinnk (talk) 00:31, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hinnk don't you think it will be c:COM:REDUNDANT to File:Kinunot na Isdang Tuna2.jpg? JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:03, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My take on it would be that they aren't redundant since neither's clearly inferior, or at least the first could be adjusted so it wouldn't be. (I myself tend to upload an extra photo or two of the same subject so editors can have some discretion, excited to find out if I've been doing it wrong this whole time!) hinnk (talk) 03:25, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]