Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2024 December 16

December 16

File:Jordan Wharf, Guimaras mango monument (Jordan, Guimaras; 01-25-2023).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 ⚡ 14:10, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted sculpture, no Creative Commons licensing permission from the designer or his heirs. Not an architecture so not eligible for {{FoP-USonly}}. Not eligible for Wikimedia Commons because there is no Freedom of Panorama in the Philippines. Not eligible for fair use tagging as there is no article about this unfamous monument itself. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 00:02, 16 December 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:3 Ace Tolkien.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; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8 as the inclusion of a non free image of book covers does not significantly enhance the biographical article Donald A. Wollheim. Also, so many free images in the article already that non-free ones are not needed. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:04, 16 December 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:Tolkien's design for The Two Towers cover.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 * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:17, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are two non free image book covers that are reasonably similar, and so violate WP:NFCC#3- minimal number of non-free images, as well as WP:NFCC#8- this secondary image does not significantly enhance the article. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:06, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have to disagree with the rationale here. Tolkien's own artwork showing the two towers of The Two Towers as Orthanc and Minas Morgul definitely significantly enhances the article (and the WP:Non-free use rationale at File:Tolkien's design for The Two Towers cover.jpg spells this out rather clearly: The image shows the two towers as Minas Morgul and Orthanc, agreeing with Tolkien's note at the end of The Fellowship of the Ring, but conflicting with other statements that he made. The illustration shows his design and his intention in 1954, and illuminates the discussion in the article.), and inherently cannot be replaced by any alternative. The difference between the two book covers is substantial. TompaDompa (talk) 17:19, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: Agree with TompaDompa. The image is remarkably central to the article, not least because it directly expresses Tolkien's intention for the book via his design for its cover. This is extensively discussed and fully cited in the article, and I explained the rationale clearly and in full in the file's Non-free use rationale. It should certainly be kept as its loss would seriously damage the article, indeed a sizeable part of it would make no sense without it. As for "similarity" between the two covers, they share precisely nothing graphical, only the wording. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:28, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is not discussed extensively in the article, it has 3 sentences about it. And none of this addresses WP:NFCC#3- minimal number of non free items, so we should not have both non-free covers listed. If this is the more important of the 2 images, then this should be the infobox and the other one deleted- but keeping both covers is a violation of NFCC. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:04, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
With respect, that completely misses the point that TompaDompa and I have made. The discussion is already substantial, covering a lot in a small space (including both the main text and two captions, not to mention the careful graphical explanation that accompanies these) and it has several key points to make, intimately involving the cover image. The article devotes a whole chapter, a top-level section, to the question of the meaning of the volume's title. As the article states, the division of the novel into three volumes was not Tolkien's decision (he wrote six 'books'), but he took the question of the title very seriously, as the images and the citations demonstrate. As the chapter illustrates and describes with an infographic map and the cover design, Tolkien, having rejected the idea of leaving the title ambiguous, as he did with many other things in the novel, initially considered four towers as individual candidates for "The Two Towers" named in the volume's title, and three pairs selected from those four towers as candidates to be "The Two". These include Saruman's Orthanc and Sauron's Barad-dûr, implying that the two towers stand for the two chief adversaries; Orthanc and Cirith Ungol, implying that the two towers stand for obstacles along the separate routes of different subgroups of the Company of the Ring; and Barad-dûr and Minas Tirith, implying that the two towers stand for the opposed realms of Mordor and Gondor, or if you wish the Dark Lord and the true King. However, as the infographic, its caption, and the caption for the cover design make clear, Tolkien eventually selected a fourth pair, Orthanc and the Nazgûl's Minas Morgul. That somewhat surprising choice points to the fallen White Wizard Saruman, and the fallen Witch-King of Angmar who has become the Lord of the Nazgûl. The caption to the cover design explains that Tolkien has shown a kind of opposition between these, one white with the rising moon, explained in the text as an allusion to its original name Minas Ithil, Tower of the Rising Moon, one black with the white hand of Saruman the White. It's a matter of judgement how much of this should be spelt out in the article, but it is certain that Tolkien considered the oppositions, and readers of the article definitely need to see Tolkien's own image to experience the shock of the surprising final choice for themselves, and thereby grasp the nature of the decision that Tolkien made.

NFCC#3 merely asks for the number of non-free items to be minimal, it does not say how many that is, and not to use two items when one would do. In this case, the infobox image shows the cover that was eventually chosen, ignoring Tolkien's wishes and all his careful deliberation about the meaning of "The Two Towers". The one in the "Meaning of title" chapter specifically illustrates the brief but actually rather complex and technical discussion (per my explanation above) of Tolkien's choice of cover and his design for it, which would be totally lamed by the absence of the cover design itself. The infobox image contributes precisely nothing to that discussion, as should be clear to anybody who has read the article. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:36, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To make matters crystal clear, I've extended the chapter with a table listing the towers that Tolkien considered for the title roles, and some text explaining a little more of his thoughts in the letters mentioned, with brief quotations. For the numerically-minded, there are now 6 sentences of main text, 7 sentences of 'Notes' in the table, and 3 sentences in the relevant image captions. Together these add up to some 500 words, which is certainly "substantial" coverage. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:17, 18 December 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:Mia Asano 2024 with Red Electric Violin.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 ⚡ 01:01, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is this really under a CC-BY 4.0 license? No immediate source is given in the description, but it is probably here, and I don't see a CC license there. Rosenzweig (talk) 18:41, 16 December 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.