Commons:Deletion requests/File:A fabulous birthday (23491654620).jpg

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:A fabulous birthday (23491654620).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Broichmore as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Selfie, does not meet any notability criteria, this is not facebook The tag was removed out of process by RZuo in special:diff/928483698.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:08, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

describe "process". RoyZuo (talk) 16:11, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

@RZuo: "If anyone disagrees with the speedy deletion of a particular file, please convert to a regular deletion request" per Commons:Deletion policy#Speedy deletion.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:17, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

i'll put down everything once and for all before you even reply.

1. the deletion reason is bogus.
   1. it's not a selfie.
   2. there's no com:csd about "notability criteria".
   3. i added it to two categories, one of which Category:IMovie shows this is for now the only file showing a person using imovie. i dont expect a deletion request based on com:scope would even be plausible.
2. i clicked one of the two buttons "remove this tag". rejection of bogus templates by any commons user is self explanatory. what process? i expect an explanation for the rash accusation.

RoyZuo (talk) 16:24, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

---

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 16:25, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

@Yann: did you just delete "the only file showing a person using imovie"?--RoyZuo (talk) 16:29, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't see how you could argue that this file illustrates that. If anything, this could illustrate a teenager's desktop, but nothing else. Yann (talk) 16:32, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

@Yann: how do you argue that https://www.flickr.com/photos/fabola/23491654620/ is not someone using imovie on a mac and moving the mouse?

even if you cannot see the software is imovie, there is only 1 other file File:Video Producer in Cape Town.jpg showing a person and cat:video editing software, which shows a man who's not using the software but instead looking at the camera.--RoyZuo (talk) 16:40, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

"someone using iMovie" is different than a picture that could illustrate that use. The screen is blurry, and since it is a free software, anyone can create a useful picture or video. This is not one of them. Yann (talk) 16:48, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

File:A fabulous birthday (23491654620).jpg

Undeleted after request at COM:UDR in order to start a new request to delete. Previous deletion request was Commons:Deletion requests/File:A fabulous birthday (23491654620).jpg. The file was nominated for deletion for the following reason: "This file was initially tagged by Broichmore as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Selfie, does not meet any notability criteria, this is not facebook" Thuresson (talk) 11:28, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Ping to interested parties: @Belbury: , @Abzeronow: , @Yann: , @Jameslwoodward: , @Bastique: , @RoyZuo: . Thuresson (talk) 11:31, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

 Keep demonstrates the use of iMovie without violating copyright. The composition of the photograph is also good. The photograph is interesting. Bastique ^{☎ appelez-moi!} 14:35, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

@Thuresson: the author of the picture is User:Fabrice Florin, an active Wikimedian who is also now an employee of the WMF. Should they be pinged as well? I do not believe that should influence one way or the other whether we keep it or not, particularly as they uploaded it to Flickr and not to Commons, but since it does involve their photo and a person that they know well, I wonder if they should be directed to this conversation? Bastique ^{☎ appelez-moi!} 14:39, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

 Delete as per my previous comment. Yann (talk) 16:01, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

 Keep for the reasons stated by Bastique. Abzeronow (talk) 16:20, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

 Keep one of the few commons files that show a girl using video editing software.

and i dont see how this flickr image is in any way inferior to commercial stock photos of the same motif https://www.gettyimages.de/search/2/image?phrase=girl%20edit%20video https://www.shutterstock.com/search/girl-edit-video .

the background is what a natural, realistic bedroom/study looks like, unlike the fake setups that give a commercial stock photo vibe.

on top of that, imovie is proprietary software by apple. the slightly blurry screen is just a perfect middle ground such that it cannot be considered a copyright violation of the proprietary software but still is recognisable enough as a girl editing videos.--RoyZuo (talk) 07:39, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

 Keep, this looks to be the only image on Commons that could meaningfully illustrate the concept of home video editing, and it would be a good fit at en:Video editing#Home video editing. It's not really a selfie, it barely shows one side of the person's face. The focus is the video editing that they're doing. Belbury (talk) 15:35, 3 October 2024 (UTC)