Commons:Deletion requests/File:Melodie Gore at Man's Ruin party 1.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

File:Melodie Gore at Man's Ruin party 1.jpg

[edit]

out of project scope MisterSynergy (talk) 11:27, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also this actress entered in en:Wrestling Isn't Wrestling, so one more proof of this image being in scope. Tm (talk) 01:36, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't have a clue why this file has been nominated for deletion, you better not start an ad hominem attack here. The Wikidata item was nominated for deletion, which is exactly the only reason why I nominated the files for deletion here as well. The Wikidata item will be gone as soon as these files and the category are deleted. —MisterSynergy (talk) 09:00, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank for clearing it up. The deletion request that you talked but didnt linked Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions#Q54595346, contrary to the claims that i making an "ad hominem attack " shows that this is a cosplayer model, so one more surprise that someone that uploads images of anonymous and random cosplayers, votes to deletes of a cosplayer with much more notability than some random cosplayer from the Internet. Also this deletion request shows that you, MisterSynergy, an administrator in Wikidata is trying to editorialize other projects with statements like "Can be deleted if the Commonscat was deleted as well. Otherwise "structural need" due to the Commons infobox." and "As a Wikidata admin, I am usually not going to file deletion requests for categories or files at Commons. However, if I think this should be done. So to win a deletion on Wikidata, you try to delete files that are in scope in another project that you almost dont contribute? Yes, i "don't have a clue" when we are talking about manipulation of projects and the attempt to delete in scope files and you dont have a clue about the policies and scope of this project when you opened Commons:Categories for discussion/2020/04/Category:Melodie Gore before this DR to delete this files and category. Tm (talk) 11:24, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As is becoming usual, Tm is clutching at straws by trying to blame me for this nomination. The images s/he points to were crops from copyright violations. S/he knows this but wants to dress it as a "moral crusade". No Tm, almost every file and category I have tagged has been deleted on policy grounds. You could try using policy reasons for keeping photos of your favourite actresses perhaps? FredWalsh (talk) 13:39, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I was referring at the "moral cursade" claim where you attack me for what you assume is my motivation, although you have no idea what is behind my request here. Bad style, really.
I have filed these files (and previously the category related to that person) for deletion as apparently nobody else is willing to dive into the Commons-related deletion business. A while ago some Commons users, including admins, have successfully lobbied at Wikidata to consider Wikidata items notable when only a (category) sitelink to Wikimedia Commons is present in the item, as in this particular case as well. This is in general okay, but very difficult in some cases since Commons content (categories in particular) is usually unreferenced; Category:Melodie Gore was apparently incorrectly categorized as "porn actress" for almost 10 years without reference and that is of course a problem. —MisterSynergy (talk) 14:32, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
To MisterSynergy: i didnt accused you of being in a 100% certain "moral crusade", but it is usual to moral crusaders make this kind of dr (or even hijack wiki hackathons) with a hidden agenda, and given that you initial deletion request didn't explain what was on the side of Wikidata (nor given any link) and merely spoke of "out of project scope", dont expect others to guess what were your real intentions. Being thi said, i dont take a word out of this being an attempt by an Wikidata administrator of editorializing other project. Other project, other policies, so this attempt of subverting an decision on Wikidata says a lot of this request and its intents. And if there is a miss categorization or other problem, the proper way to do is to correct it, like any other Wiki, as usual. In Wikidata as in Commons when one sees an error it should correct it, not deleting just because is wrong.
To FredWalsh: Do you even read what people right in each DR ir you just copypaste comments calling unrelated discussions to this discussion? Doing this you are misquoting and deturping and try to spin what others said and so you are the one making a straw man argument. To give proper context to anyone that does not know of what you are talking about, he discussion that you wrongly pointed is in Commons:Categories for discussion/2020/05/Category:Bunny Bleu where this present discussion is and Commons:Categories for discussion/2016/06/Category:Single item categories, where there was an discussion why you did created this category and ended with other users seeing what where your real intentions and with with an administrator saying, 4 years ago, to "leave us a note when your crusade is done so that we can clean up the crumbs". Are you going to contradict or spine what others said 4 years ago?
About this nomination, i´am not blaming you for this nomination, but, again repeating what i said above, you still haven't explained why did you vote to delete this image of an in scope actress and cosplayer, when you uploaded images of unknown and random cosplayers. This is a flaring contradiction, that you upload files of the same subject but of less value (and so think that your uploads are in scope), yet you vote to delete images of cosplayers with greater value. Contradictory at its finest.
And dont put words in others people mouths, like when you claim that i said or subtexted that i "blamed" you for this nomination or that this is an my "favourite actresse" (in particular when i´ve never before edited this images or category, so there goes your favoritism). Tm (talk) 21:21, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Notable work Wrestling Isn't Wrestling, so in scope. Tm (talk) 18:22, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
She had only a cameo appearance in that movie, according to en:Wrestling Isn't Wrestling#Cameos. —MisterSynergy (talk) 19:13, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And that is enough. Tm (talk) 11:16, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Tm: Well, that makes me think Common's notability criteria should be improved. I don't mind keeping the images, there are a lot of useless/non-notable files here anyways, but I do I think the category should be deleted. Keeping it harms Wikidata, as we are obliged to keep items with valid sitelinks, even if they are non-notable. I have dealt with many cross-wiki cases like this, and believe me, it's a pain when other projects do not want to cooperate like they should. Esteban16 (talk) 17:32, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Esteban16 If the item on Wikidata cant be deleted this is a problem to Wikidata to solve not Commons to solve (or on your parley "other projects do not want to cooperate like they should"), or is it now obligation of Commons to delete itens in Commons, just because Wikidata wants delete this itens and "cant" change its policies, passing your responsabilities\policies to other projects that are independent? Or are now Wikidata policies above Commons? If you have this current policy it was made users of Wikidata, not Commons users that forced Wikidata to adopt this policies, so this is a Wikidata problem and this deletion request is a fine example of one project not knowing to work themselves and passing the hot potato to others, as a fine example of "other projects (Wikidata) do not want to cooperate like they should (and change their policies and not trying to game the system". Tm (talk) 17:44, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Tm: You are partly right. I just hope in LTA cases, projects realize what should be done to stop harming Wikimedia. Esteban16 (talk) 17:51, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per Tm. Ruthven (msg) 13:39, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Melodie_Gore_at_Man%27s_Ruin_party_1.jpg&oldid=444004318"