The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as G7 by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:14, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
This is a nonfree photo used for identication purposes of the subject. A public domain photo of the person now exists and is at Commons here. Indy beetle ( talk) 11:03, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:05, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
This non-free image is being used in the infobox for an episode of Better Call Saul. The non-free usage rationale does not state a purpose; its just describes the scene. The image's use is decorative, and the removal of the image would not detract from a reader's understanding of the article. Fails WP:NFCC#8. Whpq ( talk) 11:33, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:06, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Per WP:NFCC, non-free media must add significantly to a reader's understanding of the subject and its omission would be detrimental to the topic. This screen video capture features a relatively mundane and common feature in music videos (the artist with back up dancers). Nothing about the image is significant that it adds anything to the reader's understanding. The purpose incorrectly identifies that the screen image identifies the article's topic. The topic is the song which is identified by the single cover (which is also non-free). Therefore in terms of identification this image is not required. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 13:45, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:06, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
No rational has been provided for WP:NFCC#1 - the free alternative is a text description, of which is it already included in the video. The purpose ( WP:NFCC#8) is given as identification for the article topic however, this is not the case given that the music video is a small part of the overall subject. The single cover art (which is also non-free media) is the main identifier for this subject. No rational supplied for WP:NFCC#1 or WP:NFCC#2. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 13:48, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: relisted on 2022 May 6. ✗ plicit 00:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia does not exist as a promotional tool. The removal of the image would not be detrimental to reader's understanding of the article, nor does it help to identify the work. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 15:10, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Per WP:NFCC, purpose needs to explain exactly why it is needed and what it adds to the article. The purpose here says to depict a scene in the music video. This does not meet the requirements of irreplaceability or necessity. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 15:26, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
The rational given for the image says "its facilitates critical commentary". There's no critical commentary of the exact outfit or pose depicted in the picture. The simplistic nature of the image is already sufficiently explained in prose. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 15:57, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
A simplistic image which depicts something easily described in words and for which its removal would not be detrimental to the reader's understanding. The description says it depicts the subject in "a sexy outfit", something which is broad, ambiguous and non-distinct. Under purpose, it states that the image is used to define the song however the infobox doesn't use the image therefore this is incorrect. The topic of the article is the song not music video. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 16:02, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
The purpose says the image is used to define the subject of the article, the song. This is incorrect. The image is a capture from the music video but the article itself is about the song, only one section pertains to the music video. The exclusion of the image is not detrimental to readers understanding as it is already sufficiently explained in words ( WP:NFCC) ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 16:03, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
The scene used for the screen capture is overly simplistic and not subject to critical commentary within the article. Therefore its omission is not detrimental to readers understanding. The rational given is that the picture aids with the "video's content" which is not sufficient to negate WP:NFCC when such matters can be and are adequately discussed in words. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 16:05, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
This particular scene of the music video is not subject to critical commentary and the omission of the image is not detrimental to the readers understanding of the topic. The purpose says the image "illustrates the music video" which is not correct. An illustration of a copyright media is not suitable under WP:NFCC as a valid exemption from copyright laws. The subject of the article is the song not the music video, which is already identified by the non-free single artwork. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 16:22, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
At the time of nomination, the description states "three screen shots" which is not minimal use per WP:NFCC#3. The description also says low resolution but this is not the case given the amount of detail in the picture. No contextual significance has been provided as the contents of the image are not subject to critical commentary within the article ( WP:NFCC#8). Additionally per WP:DAILYMAIL the source is depreciated from use. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 16:25, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Derivative work of a brochure. Could be in public domain if published without a copyright notice, but we'll need proof of this. Only used in gallery and therefore unlikely to qualify for fair use. Ixfd64 ( talk) 22:22, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Derivative work of advertisement. Could be in public domain if published without a copyright notice, but this requires evidence. Ixfd64 ( talk) 22:42, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as G7 by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:14, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
This is a nonfree photo used for identication purposes of the subject. A public domain photo of the person now exists and is at Commons here. Indy beetle ( talk) 11:03, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:05, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
This non-free image is being used in the infobox for an episode of Better Call Saul. The non-free usage rationale does not state a purpose; its just describes the scene. The image's use is decorative, and the removal of the image would not detract from a reader's understanding of the article. Fails WP:NFCC#8. Whpq ( talk) 11:33, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:06, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Per WP:NFCC, non-free media must add significantly to a reader's understanding of the subject and its omission would be detrimental to the topic. This screen video capture features a relatively mundane and common feature in music videos (the artist with back up dancers). Nothing about the image is significant that it adds anything to the reader's understanding. The purpose incorrectly identifies that the screen image identifies the article's topic. The topic is the song which is identified by the single cover (which is also non-free). Therefore in terms of identification this image is not required. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 13:45, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:06, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
No rational has been provided for WP:NFCC#1 - the free alternative is a text description, of which is it already included in the video. The purpose ( WP:NFCC#8) is given as identification for the article topic however, this is not the case given that the music video is a small part of the overall subject. The single cover art (which is also non-free media) is the main identifier for this subject. No rational supplied for WP:NFCC#1 or WP:NFCC#2. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 13:48, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: relisted on 2022 May 6. ✗ plicit 00:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia does not exist as a promotional tool. The removal of the image would not be detrimental to reader's understanding of the article, nor does it help to identify the work. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 15:10, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Per WP:NFCC, purpose needs to explain exactly why it is needed and what it adds to the article. The purpose here says to depict a scene in the music video. This does not meet the requirements of irreplaceability or necessity. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 15:26, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
The rational given for the image says "its facilitates critical commentary". There's no critical commentary of the exact outfit or pose depicted in the picture. The simplistic nature of the image is already sufficiently explained in prose. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 15:57, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
A simplistic image which depicts something easily described in words and for which its removal would not be detrimental to the reader's understanding. The description says it depicts the subject in "a sexy outfit", something which is broad, ambiguous and non-distinct. Under purpose, it states that the image is used to define the song however the infobox doesn't use the image therefore this is incorrect. The topic of the article is the song not music video. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 16:02, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
The purpose says the image is used to define the subject of the article, the song. This is incorrect. The image is a capture from the music video but the article itself is about the song, only one section pertains to the music video. The exclusion of the image is not detrimental to readers understanding as it is already sufficiently explained in words ( WP:NFCC) ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 16:03, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
The scene used for the screen capture is overly simplistic and not subject to critical commentary within the article. Therefore its omission is not detrimental to readers understanding. The rational given is that the picture aids with the "video's content" which is not sufficient to negate WP:NFCC when such matters can be and are adequately discussed in words. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 16:05, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
This particular scene of the music video is not subject to critical commentary and the omission of the image is not detrimental to the readers understanding of the topic. The purpose says the image "illustrates the music video" which is not correct. An illustration of a copyright media is not suitable under WP:NFCC as a valid exemption from copyright laws. The subject of the article is the song not the music video, which is already identified by the non-free single artwork. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 16:22, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
At the time of nomination, the description states "three screen shots" which is not minimal use per WP:NFCC#3. The description also says low resolution but this is not the case given the amount of detail in the picture. No contextual significance has been provided as the contents of the image are not subject to critical commentary within the article ( WP:NFCC#8). Additionally per WP:DAILYMAIL the source is depreciated from use. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 16:25, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Derivative work of a brochure. Could be in public domain if published without a copyright notice, but we'll need proof of this. Only used in gallery and therefore unlikely to qualify for fair use. Ixfd64 ( talk) 22:22, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Derivative work of advertisement. Could be in public domain if published without a copyright notice, but this requires evidence. Ixfd64 ( talk) 22:42, 28 April 2022 (UTC)