Commons:Deletion requests/File:The Little Mermaid in Sillhouette.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.

Is the mere close silhouette of the sculpture close enough to the real "design" (contoured around it exactly) to be considered a COM:DW of the artwork the silhouette is trying to hide? --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 01:45, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think there is a good chance that could be considered a derivative work because it still contains an element of the original sculpture (its outline) that would be sufficient for copyright on its own. Therefore,  Delete. – BMacZero (🗩) 16:49, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep There are many similar pictures on Commons since years[1]. ~ R.T.G 21:36, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Many of the ones you've "cited" are eiher really censored to the point that it isn't just an outline of the actual work[2] or blurred to the point no faithful reproduction can be made from it[3] in order for it to qualify as a COM:DW. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 01:43, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • The fact that we've had these images for a while is suggestive but isn't an actual reason why they are legal - ideally we can find one. Only one of them has been involved in a DR, and that was as part of a massive FoP DR where it did not receive any specific discussion. Here a natural silhoutte of a sculpture was deleted, though without much discussion. Here we kept such an image on the ground that the outline was much rougher than the actual sculpture, which I think is a safe approach we could move forward with. Here we kept some building silhouttes on the grounds that they were simple shapes (which I don't think this one is). – BMacZero (🗩) 16:55, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Mildly related: the statue's copyright holder has been enforcing his copyright[1]. – BMacZero (🗩) 17:15, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Okay I am just going to say that the difference between this silhouetted image and the others are that this one is attractive in a purely artistic sense because of the scene around the statue. I am going to say the silhouetted buildings given as an example are copies, designed to perfectly replicate the buildings design, whereas the silhouette is an emphasisedly imperfect attempt to blot the thing out of the scene and transorfm its appearance (which I thought is working quite well as it doesn't look to me quite the same statue though it is a very close silhouette, I thought it was going to make a great educational example of how silhouette can effect transformation). ~ R.T.G 02:34, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: This is not even a close question. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:26, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]