Commons:Deletion requests/File:Wikipe tan wearing a bikini by Kasuga39.png

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

This deletion debate 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:Wikipe_tan_wearing_a_bikini_by_Kasuga39.png[edit]

It's a copy of File:Wikipe-tan in swimwear.jpg, which was recently deleted (see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Wikipe-tan in swimwear.jpg). I can't see that file, but I think this is an exact copy or very nearly so, so the same decision should apply to this file. Herostratus (talk) 07:02, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Heavily in use. Tm (talk) 07:22, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Educational use is present here and the image is used in multiple articles, this is not a copy of wikipe-tan in swimwear by the way so the nom is void in my opinion, the original image was this one: File:Wikipe-tan in swimwear.png which looks nothing like the image put up for deletion here. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:35, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

  • Keep Image is well within scope as it is used in article space on multiple languages. I'll also note that the nominator has attempted to remove this image from the English Wikipedia multiple times and could not get a consensus there. TheFarix (talk) 02:44, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Oh, OK. Never mind. I was confusing two files. (Although I'm further confused by the existence of the page File:Wikipe-tan in swimwear.png after a discussion closed as "delete", but whatever, not germane to this discussion.)

Any any rate, I'm still nominating this file for deletion, but on different grounds: whatever reasonably likely educational value it provides is far outweighed by its negative aspects.

1) To the extent that it's used for decoration on people's personal pages on Wikimedia projects, that gives it no value as an entity to be hosted by Commons.
2) To the extent that its in common space on Foundation projects, its toxic. We don't need or want cheesecake pics in these spaces, and it is objectively harmful to Foundation projects to do this. See here and various other places.
3) To the extent that it's in article space on wikipedias, this is not legitimate since it contains marks identifiable as referencing a private corporate entity (the Wikipedia Foundation), and egregiously as the marks are not related to the content of the articles in which its used; this would be no more allowed than if the earrings showed the logo of American Airlines or whatever.
Now, it's true on one level that this should be argued at the retail level of the individual articles on the individual wikipedias. Where we can be treated to lengthy debates featuring disingenuous arguments such as "That is just a random person with random puzzle pieces, they have nothing to do with the Wikimedia Foundation" and discussions of the meaning of trademark and the difference between difference a trademark and a copyright and between a registered and unregistered trademark and a work which, trademark or not, implicitly references another entity. With assorted refugees from /b/ who are neither interested in or (to be frank) probably capable of understanding these concepts. And thus going on to request boards for third-party input and so on and so forth, ending after much work and drama in the deletion of the image from the article. Until next year, at which point repeat as needed. So I would rather not go through all that, but it is in the hands of Commons I guess.

Source of negative energy. Delete. Herostratus (talk) 03:13, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

You make plenty of wild accusations, but have absolutely 0 evidence that the accusations are even true. (1) Your argument is completely unsupported by the very wording of COM:SCOPE (A media file that is in use on one of the other projects of the Wikimedia Foundation is considered automatically to be useful for an educational purpose). (2) Your "objectively harmful" has no bases in fact (In fact, it is mostly men speculating that Wikipe-tan "drives off women" without any evidence, i.e. scapegoating.) (3) Wikipe-tan's design does not contain any trademarks or logos used by WikiMedia Foundation. TheFarix (talk) 03:30, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Keep. All arguments provided by nom are too subjective.-- deerstop. 11:21, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep arguments are nonsense, such as Farix said. But 2) may be a occasion for someone to draw a guy in swimwear, so we can attract more female users :D --Don-kun (talk) 11:34, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Can't see the reason for this deletion request. It's an good example, which could be easily improved. I see no valid reason for deletion. --Niabot (talk) 11:37, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Keep - The nominator is essentially forum shopping because his attempts to get it removed in an article were rejected. We have policies specificially w:NOTCEBSORED which allows for its use on the article page's she is used under. Furthermore, the nominator has a personal bias against Wikipe-tan so its hard to see this nomination in good faith.Jinnai (talk) 16:10, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep no sexuall content. You don't see naked boobies or something like that. So why should it be delete? It's also no copy of a another picture more like a grown Wikipe-tan --Dr. Koto (talk) 17:27, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep I'm a woman and I think that this gendergap's initiative is a real madness. Анастасия Львоваru (ru-n, en-2) 18:22, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
    • It is, it is nothing but pure scapegoating by editors who really believe that getting rid of wikipe-tan images will somehow make more female editors join, I started a discussion on jimbo's talk page last month and it appers that there has been discussion after discussion on the matter with the chat content going in circles. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:02, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep I like this Wikipe-tan--Хомелка (talk) 18:52, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Strongly keep. First of all the image is used in several Wikipedias proving it has an educational value. Also the whole initiative of deleting Wikipe-tan images, connected with accusing the mascot and thus all the community of being sexist seems to undermine the basic principles of good faith that we always regarded as a rule. Avenger911 (talk) 22:47, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Strongly Symbol keep vote.svg Keep, no any reason for delete this file! --minhhuy*= (talk) 06:16, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep This image violates no rules, guidelines or wikiquette principles. There is no reason to delete this image--SamOdin (talk) 09:59, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep, the file mentioned by nominator is restored, so no reasons for deletion left. BTW, anyone now could see that these pics are absolutely different. AndyVolykhov (talk) 12:54, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep There is no reason to delete this image. --Jocian (talk) 22:55, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Hands off! :P --Zimak (talk) 13:05, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep There is no reasonable reason.--Altostratus (talk) 08:14, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Whatever standard of tastelessness you measure it by doesn't dismiss the fact that it's used on more than a few wikis. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 08:37, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep ofc. Reason per user:Хомелка. --Askarmuk (talk) 14:01, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Per Хомелка. --Krassotkin (talk) 07:21, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep per User:TheFarix right at the top. COM:SCOPE#File in use in another Wikimedia project says

    "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."

    This is a drawing of a female in a bikini; not even a particularly small female or a particularly small bikini. She's even wearing a towel! Several Wikipedia languages apparently consider this file appropriate: they're using it. Also, nominator used Commons:Deletion requests/File:Wikipe-tan in swimwear.jpg (which almost nobody else would consider the same) as a claim of deletion outcome — but that image has since been undeleted by Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2011-03#File:Wikipe-tan_in_swimwear.jpg (restored). Sometimes, perhaps, we forget that we who edit Wikimedia projects are only a minority of Wikimedia users, and even a smaller minority of the general public; most people in the general public would not associate this specific drawing with a child in the first place. For this file's appropriateness to even be in question, one has to: (1) be familiar enough with Wikimedia projects to know who Wikipe-tan is and that she is usually drawn with moe anthropomorphism; (2) make the assumption that moe anthropomorphism indicates underaged girls (even the ones drawn combined with military weapons?!), therefore Wikipe-tan must be underaged; (3) believe this file represents Wikipe-tan still as a child; and (4) believe that the standard modern female attire for teenage and adult women on public beaches in most civilizations is inappropriate. (I'll not even opine on what kind of person would also have to believe that fictional mascots, with puzzle pieces in their hair and no specific planetary origin, are moral equivalent of live human children. I'm sure that's been rehased on Commons and Wikipedias hundreds of times.) As far as "objectively harmful": It could be argued that that prospective Wikimedia participants who find this file offensive would be just as objectively harmful because they have a point of view so distant from COM:NOTCENSORED that their participation on Wikipedia projects would take more time away from other contributors than they would provide in contributions themselves. --Closeapple (talk) 09:46, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Combining the statements 1-4 I can only say that this are pictures of Wikipe-tan at different age. Even so it is hard to judge the age of an comic figure. Some examples Komoe Tsukuyomi (School Teacher in To Aru Majutsu no Index), Horo (Hundreds of years old and main character in Spice and Wolf),... There are so many examples in which the outer appearance is not related to the real age. Also it has to be considered that a story can play at very different times. This said, the age can only be verified for each picture individually, if not truly impossible. I highlighted real because even the age of fictional figure is also fictional and the assumptions about the age may strongly divide. Regarding to this picture she could be seen as 16 or also 28. How will you verify her age? [1] --Niabot (talk) 11:24, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Image is used in the mainspace in WMF project(s), and does not violate COM:SCOPE. I don't see any valid reason for its deletion. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 09:51, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep It has been alleged that this file violates trademark in multiple places, I have yet to see any evidence. It is used in article space, is clearly within the scope of the project, and I have yet to see a good reason to delete. Monty845 (talk) 02:27, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Request for closure Can this be laid to rest now, It has been over two weeks now and I am seeing almost if not all keeps aside from the nom here, if this were on wikipedia it would pass the wikipedia snow clause. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:37, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Please remove this File to delete box from page of this graphic that I can send new svg version of this file on commons Malyszkz (talk) 19:52, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Kept Jcb (talk) 10:19, 10 April 2011 (UTC)