Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 October 31

< October 30	November 1 >

October 31

File:Denno.ogg

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: keep. Bottom line is that anyone who clicks this video knows full well what they're getting into, as it's marked at every turn saying that it was reported to cause seizures in Japanese children. It is not our responsibility to protect people from their own unwillingness to read the captions. SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:16, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

From Description: "The infamous scene [...] which was responsible for causing epileptic seizures in several hundred Japanese children". Citing Wikipedia:Content disclaimer is not an excuse for going out of our way to cause seizures. Of coerce we can't remove every video because someone, somewhere has a medical condition, but this is ridiculous. If somebody gets seriously injured or dies because of this, that's Wikipedia's fault. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 01:21, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, somebody who played this video would likely assume that we've done something to this video to make it safe. The reason they would think that is that nobody in their right mind would intentionally upload a video infamous for causing seizures on to the Internet unless they've done something to make it safe. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 01:43, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the numerous discussions at Talk:Dennō Senshi Porygon including one RfC. The video fully meets all the requirements of WP:NFCC and the article would be This is an end run around the previous consensus and removing the clip via deletion would be detrimental to the readers' understanding of the controversy surrounding it. Also, the clip has been scaled down to a very low-resolution, making it unlikely to induce seizures in a reader. —Farix (t | c) 23:05, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep WP:RISK & WP:CENSORSHIP -- 65.92.181.190 (talk) 06:04, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the rationale presented by User:TheFarix. Northamerica1000^(talk) 05:05, 5 November 2012 (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:Galatasaray1913-1914.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, low quality. SchuminWeb (Talk) 07:20, 31 October 2012 (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:LTPorkyPig19371938TitleCard.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:02, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The FUR is for the article Porky Pig, but the file is only used in the article Porky Pig filmography. Besides, both articles have way too many non-free images. This image, as well as many other images in both article, fails WP:NFCC#3a. It also fails WP:NFCC#3b. Stefan2 (talk) 13:21, 31 October 2012 (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:Kevin Schmidt as Noah.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:02, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#3a: there is already a photo of the character portrayed by a different actor. See File:Robert Adamson as Noah.jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 13:58, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The infobox allows for two more character portrayals to be portrayed. So since WP:SOAPS allows it, I don't see why it should be nominated for deletion. livelikemusic ^{my talk page!} 18:24, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An infobox might allow multiple images. This doesn't mean that WP:NFCC#3a allows that. Multiple images could, for example, be used in articles about characters from public domain films. --Stefan2 (talk) 23:16, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with LLM. The soap info-box allows multiple images and there is no reason that we can't include an image of the character while played by an actor who was in the role for 4 years. His portrayal of Noah is the most relevant. Both images do represent the same thing but both actors play the role in a different way and look different, so no, they are not completely the same and WP:NFCC#3a doesn't fully apply here. It's been done in probably hundreds or thousands of articles (multiple images to convey each notable actor's portrayal). Ar re 00:05, 1 November 2012 (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:Applied Materials Endura system.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:02, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Obtain written permission prior to using this photo." clause is incompatable with Wikipedia licensing requirements. This invalidates the CC-BY-SA 3.0 license, meaning the file must be deleted. This is also Sven Manguard 14:34, 31 October 2012 (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:Flag of California (alternate).svg

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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons. Please nominate it for deletion there if you still feel it should be deleted. AnomieBOT ⚡ 00:00, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The user created the file during a 2007 discussion of the flags colors. He stated that once the debate was concluded, the image can be deleted. Do to their excellent efforts, the colors were updated and this image is no longer needed. Both Zscout370 and Mike Dillon contributed to the discussion. --DevinCook (talk) 23:37, 31 October 2012 (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.