< July 4 July 6 >

July 5

File:Microsoft 1984-Scott McGregor, Charles Simonyi, and Gordon Letwin.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. B (talk) 11:09, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Microsoft 1984-Scott McGregor, Charles Simonyi, and Gordon Letwin.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Shrinkydinks (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

File's non-free use in Scott A. McGregor#1978–1998: Software industry doesn't, in my opinion, meet WP:NFCC#1 (WP:FREER) and WP:NFCC#8 (WP:NFC#CS), with its non-free use being more more WP:DECORATIVE than not. There's no real sourced critical commentary about the photo itself anywhere in McGregor article (the only mention of Fortune (the magazine where the photo first appeared) is a simple declarative statement in the image's caption) and while there's may be some historical significance to the three persons in the photo coming together as a group and to the things they accomplished while they worked at MIcorsoft, the same cannot automatically be said about the photo itself per WP:ITSHISTORIC. There's quite a lot of detail (e.g. "In placing each engineer next to the other two, visually, and in context of an interview with Fortune on behalf of Microsoft, this photo highlights the significance of each person that would not be communicable with prose alone.") about why the file "needs to be" used in its non-free use rationale, but none of that seems to reflect how it's actually being used in the article and none of the interpretations made about the photo in the non-free use rationale are supported by any secondary sourced commentary about it in the article. If such commentary can be properly supported by secondary reliable sources, then it should be added to the article along with supporting citations; if not, then it's nothing more than a kind of image-related WP:OR which is insufficient to justify the file's non-free use simply based upon a caption saying the three were pictured together in a 1984 issue of Fortune magazine. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:06, 5 July 2020 (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:AlexandraTaraReade.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT 08:07, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:AlexandraTaraReade.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Hodgdon's secret garden (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Fails WP:NFCC#1. She is a living person, and File:Tara Reade (cropped, color cast removed).png exists. Editors at the talk page may decide not to use the 1992 photo for editorial reasons, but that's not a reason to use a modern photo which is not the subject of critical commentary. Plenty of living people have no photo in their article. Either take the 1992 photo or leave it (i.e. no photo at all). King of ♥ 03:39, 5 July 2020 (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.