Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Jarrod stanley

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.

Files uploaded by Jarrod stanley (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Videos without content, out of scope.

Extended content

Yann (talk) 12:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep – These should all be converted to audio. Considering them for the audio / as audio, they are some of the most useful audio files on WMC when excluding music (additionally I think they also are the only files on here I used so far). These are soundscapes, of which there are few and these are good-quality. If the uploader indeed created them it was very constructive and brought some quite valuable useful things to WMC. Prototyperspective (talk) 14:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Didn't notice they were looped. They should have been non-looped audio files. Maybe the user doesn't know how to convert webm to audio files. I think some info on that is missing at the page linked at Commons:Audio#Converting audio. Prototyperspective (talk) 00:02, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment I would like more information on the works, especially as if they're legitimate recordings of what they say they are, created by the user, they would have taken a lot of time and travel to gather. If they are, then reuploading them as audio files does seem reasonable. There doesn't seem much reason for them to stay as is, though.--Prosfilaes (talk) 15:36, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They're looped audio recordings, created to maximize play time on Youtube. For example, File:Small Waterfall.webm is a loop about 6 minutes long, played about ten times; there's a distinctive "splooshing" noise around 0:30 which repeats around 6:30, 12:30, 18:30, etc. I haven't reviewed the other videos, but given their "perfect" lengths (2 hours, 6 hours, 10 hours) it's almost a certainty that they're loops as well. I wouldn't be surprised one bit if some of the claims of provenance (e.g. "Hudson River rapids") are inaccurate as well. Omphalographer (talk) 19:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. In addition, I don't see these "relaxing" audio/videos are in scope in any way. Yann (talk) 20:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Audio recordings of a river are just as in scope as photographs of the same river.--Prosfilaes (talk) 20:15, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not so sure.
  • First of all, mmost of these videos aren't even attributed to a specific body of water, let alone a location (e.g. "Waterfall Running Water Sound", "Bubbling Water Sound", "Asian Whirlpool", "River and Brown Noise", etc). An image with that vague of a description would probably be deleted; in fact, there's a couple groups of photos nominated today for that exact reason ("Low quality photos of generic landscapes").
  • Second, I'm not convinced that audio recordings are a useful way of illustrating rivers. The way an actual river sounds depends heavily on how much water is in it, where on the river you are, and how the recording is made. A microphone right by the water on a calm summer day will sound much different from a recording made from a distance during a spring flood, for example. And unlike a photo where these conditions can be ascertained from the image itself, an audio recording (and especially an edited recording, like these are) provides no context.
Omphalographer (talk) 21:10, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are there any sounds nominated for that reason? I'm happy to delete mediocre examples of something we have many copies of, but recording reality in all of its various forms and mediums is useful, and we should have files letting us see, hear, smell and touch just about everything. Touch can partially be done with 3D recordings, but smell is currently out of reach; audio, on the other hand, is easily recorded and played back.--Prosfilaes (talk) 00:14, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete These files should be deleted. In theory the unlooped audio of many of these could be in scope, but there's too many questions of sourcing for me; I'm skeptical that they're free samples by the uploader and correctly described.--Prosfilaes (talk) 20:15, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 I agree with Prosfilaes and Jeff G.. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 20:21, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete per Jeff G. I've no objection to them as audio files, but blank video is pointless. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:41, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete and ask the user to upload non-looped audio only files with proper licensing evidence. --Mrb Rafi (talk) 05:10, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. Clear consensus that this is out of scope. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:00, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_Jarrod_stanley&oldid=917946804"