Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mona Lisa-gutenberg121 1.jpg
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.
Poor quality image and unused. There are many better alternatives in category:Mona Lisa. Angelus(talk) 02:24, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Keep That is no valid reason for deletion. --Matthiasb (talk) 22:07, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Delete - Commons is a image repository, but not an "image hosting site"! If an image is superseded, it may be nominated for deletion (according to the Commons guidelines)! So the fact that a file is unused and there are alternatives with better resolution IS a reason for a deletion request! --Angelus(talk) 22:36, 14 March 2014 (UTC)- Delete - duplicate/redundant --Nicola Romani (talk) 09:51, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
- Delete - per nom.--Baku (talk) 14:06, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
- Is used now, however there are no specific reasons given why another file (which?) is inferior to this, so guideline does not apply. Further, this is a scan from a specific book so it has historic value itself. Such a file never should be deleted, never. --Matthiasb (talk) 19:03, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
- It is clear that files such as these have a higher quality and resolution (even those who are not expert in photography can see it):
- File:Mona Lisa, by Leonardo da Vinci, from C2RMF retouched.jpg
- File:Leonardo da Vinci - Mona Lisa.jpg
- File:Mona Lisa.jpg
- File:La Gioconda.jpg
- ...
And there are others in that category. However, the file is used in a discussion (a survey) held by you ad hoc, not in an encyclopedia entry. --Angelus(talk) 19:38, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
- Actually it depends on your monitor and/or resolution if one can see which imae has a higher quality (and it's quite funny to discuss which of the several differently toned images fits better to the Mona Lisa which today does not appear as originally created, it has very likely darkened over the time – so you did everything but showing for which specific reason any of the four abovementioned files might be better. That is insufficient for deleting.
- Further: That the file is used only on a talk page does not make it out of scope of project, indeed it should be stressed that Commons does not exist to editorialise on other projects – that an image is in use on a non talk/user page is enough for it to be within scope. but a project page, and it is of encyclopedic use to compare those files and show that your arguments are at least insufficient, to show that deletion praxis on commons and/or rules and/or praxis on other projects not necessarily corespond to each other. (BTW: de:w:WP:Café is no a talk page (rather is is a w:Gesamtkunstwerk and therefore educational) Ceterum censeo… --Matthiasb (talk) 20:34, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
- Here we are not talking about the project scope, but of a superseded image! The dpi of the image are objectively lower. The low resolution of the image necessarily affect the quality of the file. And is visible to the naked eye, on all monitors.
- Moreover if it was enough open a poll - ad hoc - on an image (making the file "in use"), to close a deletion request, it could be done with all the images proposed for deletion. In this way, a user could avoid the deletion of any superseded image. --Angelus(talk) 21:23, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
- Yes he could. If an image is in use it is assumed to be educational. If it is educational you cannot draw the superseding rule. Still you have not provided a specific reason why the image requested for deletion is inferior, i.e. the basic reason for drawing the superseding rule. How can you state, that a lower DPI makes an image less usable? I can imagine dozens of usages in which a higher resolution rather prevents usage. BTW: I don't know if I need to wear glasses or need a better monitor but I am not able to see which of the images in the beforementioned "poll" is the best. Focussing on DPI only it might be the sixth ;-) --Matthiasb (talk) 23:33, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Kept: Scan, not a duplicate. This image comes from the Project Gutenberg archives. -- Steinsplitter (talk) 10:48, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
