File:China Crosses Yalu.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jim101 ( | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Seemingly PD, on Commons as File:Chinese troops crossing Amrokgang river.jpg JayCubby 07:41, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as-is The source of this predates publication in North Korea by 7 years (1951 vs 1958). I suspect Commons is incorrect. Buffs (talk) 21:18, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ssmlt.JPG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Captfantastic05 ( | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

One of picture sleeves not contextually significant to the song in question, despite containing image of the singer and song titles. The free image (File:Someone saved my life tonight elton john US single generic label.png) doesn't need to comply with NFCC just as long as it's still free to use. George Ho (talk) 13:08, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just for info, what was the source of this image? It's also not clear where/how it was used. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:17, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The sleeve was part of the German release (45cat, discogs, ebay). The image has been used as the lead image of the song article. George Ho (talk) 15:00, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Yes, I knew about the song article Someone Saved My Life Tonight. There seems to be no source at the upload page (not that it really matters, I guess). Martinevans123 (talk) 15:34, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep add link to source. Buffs (talk) 21:19, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  In where? The file page or the song article? George Ho (talk) 21:47, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The file page. Buffs (talk) 22:55, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  What about the image's compliance with the "contextual significance" criterion (WP:NFC#CS)? George Ho (talk) 00:17, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  "Articles about albums and singles normally contain the cover art of that work for purposes of identification which is usually copyrighted." Buffs (talk) 15:01, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Nice of you to restate your arguments... or proposed rule that has yet to become part of WP:NFC.

  Anyways, the cover art was still part of the German release. Neither the British (45cat,discogs) nor American single release has had a picture sleeve, I'm afraid.

  Also, the main customers were most likely the British and the Americans. Those who bought the single would most likely expect a portion to accurately identify what was distributed to them, i.e. a single packaged in a generic sleeve, instead of a German one or a picture sleeve.

  Of course, the vinyl labels of certain pressings contain a custom painting or drawing of Elton John from the parent album containing the song. Nonetheless, sometimes, a free image is preferable unless a non-free one is proven to be more suitable (MOS:MUSIC#Images and notation). In this case, the US label portion I uploaded in hopes to replace the German one.

  If any of the above doesn't convince you adequately, then how's this: even without the German picture sleeve, a reader would already understand what the song is about and its background/origins. Well, it's Elton John's personal song... and another one of his hits. An image of him on the front cover wouldn't enhance that, IMO. Not even the German picture sleeve's way of branding and marketing the song. Same argument can go for other non-UK/non-US releases of the single, eh? In my opinion, free content available should be adequate and make non-free content less necessary, especially for "identification" that you argued about. George Ho (talk) 16:19, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, I restated the consensus of that discussion as concise as I could (regardless of whether it's documented in NFC or not). Regardless of its release location, it does seem to be the most recognizable/used cover art, common for an international artist: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] etc Buffs (talk) 17:47, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  (Should've countered your argument with WP:SAIDSO earlier, but whatevs.)

  Being commonly seen elsewhere outside Wikipedia still doesn't make the cover art contextually significant to the song. (WP:OTHERIMAGE, perhaps?)

  Like 45cat and discogs, the first few sources you're citing are user-generated. Nonetheless, even the 45cat and discogs have details about where the picture sleeve originated. Even rateyourmusic does the same, especially for the North American release using a different custom label.

  Fandom currently lacks sufficient details about the image. Even if it contains caption/details, Fandom's verifiability is somewhat questionable. Well, it's Fandom, right?

  A possibly fansite even tells readers where it originated.

  Why does Alamy uses the German picture sleeve (without identifying it as such) as a stock image or some sort is beyond me.

  Dunno why the New Zealand charts website (specific week) uses the German cover art, despite the New Zealand release lacking one in its original release (discogs). George Ho (talk) 19:38, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I've explained it's for purposes of identification. You state that it needs to have contextual significance beyond that. I disagree and most people agree with me. Dunno what else to tell you. Buffs (talk) 21:45, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  (Belated reply) I don't intend to further rebut your assertion about "purposes of identification" as sufficient to meet NFCC. Indeed, countering such assertion is too challenging for me. Actually, I explained to another user below about the historical context of singles releases, especially of the same song. Do you still stand by your current vote, despite my explanations below? George Ho (talk) 04:40, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I made my point long ago and find continued discussion along these lines to be in poor form/distasteful. Buffs (talk) 20:45, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Can't you just propose the essay you link to be promoted into a guideline? George Ho (talk) 21:08, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  You know what? I know you've made up your mind already, so let's stop here then. --George Ho (talk) 21:11, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Geez, man. YES! I can. I already proposed it (see the linked discussion). I think it's the current view. That it's not codified in a guideline doesn't make it any less a consensus. Now PLEASE let it go!Buffs (talk) 21:38, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I truly fail to see how the recent trend of changing all the 7" sleeves to their generic labels benefits/improves the articles in any way. We don't use the center labels of LPs to identify full albums, and while you could argue that constitutes WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, that still doesn't answer why we would arbitrarily create a different standard for 45s vs. LPs when it comes to this matter. Elephantranges (talk) 12:44, 4 May 2025 (UTC) Striking out former vote on behalf of Elephantranges, who changed own vote. George Ho (talk) 03:22, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I truly fail to see how the recent trend of changing all the 7" sleeves to their generic labels benefits/improves the articles in any way. It's more of historical context and about helping readers grasp which customers received whichever edition packaged in a generic sleeve vs. those receiving one packaged in a picture sleeve. Books have discussed picture sleeves especially as a marketing tool. Id est, the haves and have-nots trend?

Also, I think the decline of CD singles and continuing rise of digital/streaming might have allowed vinyl resurgence, including those seeking old surviving vinyl copies. Readers would compare editions released, especially on (user-generated) Discogs.

Too bad plenty of others favor cover arts, especially for demographics who cared more about songs themselves than the packaging and manufacturing and "haves vs have-nots" thing.

In certain cases, American customers (before the cassette/CD singles era) boughts (45-RPM) singles of American-produced song recordings packed in generic (company) sleeves. Of course, in other cases, free images are usually preferred because... well, to me, a non-free image can be sometimes... a cop-out, right?

In this case, this cover art is gaining "keep" votes just because, IMO, it is relatable (especially to masses) and easy to identify and recognize. Initial intent (of the single release) was for German customers, despite being a copy/derivative of the parent album's cover; seems you guys find it encyclopedic. Well, Elton John and his songs grew popular, especially in the American market back in the days. The US market received the single release packed in... a generic sleeve. I guess we'll agree to disagree, huh? (I thought about displaying a label portion of the British single since John was British-born, but the US single is freer, more comfortable to use, and wasn't much different from the British one.)

We don't use the center labels of LPs to identify full albums. Albums ≠ singles (obviously, to me), and I don't know why you are comparing them both. Too bad album covers and single covers are treated (almost?) indistinguishably, and it's hard to counter that argument when the masses agree with this assessment.

that still doesn't answer why we would arbitrarily create a different standard for 45s vs. LPs when it comes to this matter. Standards for LPs are consistent, and I don't intend to replace cover arts with center labels. Standards for 45s, nonetheless, vary, especially with different eras, yet I fear for readers lacking historical sense (of what singles had been like back then in pre-CD era and then pre-digital era). George Ho (talk) 00:48, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, I didn't realize just how many of Elton's singles only had picture sleeves in smaller European territories and not in any major markets.

I think what I (and some other) people might get held up on is the justification of the center label being a "freer" image, which is a bit vague and possibly subjective (at least somewhat)?

But I'll agree that when it comes to an artist from the UK it's not necessarily important to show what their product would have looked like to people in, say, Germany (and only Germany), so I'll change my vote for this one to Delete.

As a side note, I do still question the necessity of replacing the cover art for, say, Rocket Man since its UK release did have unique sleeve art. (Elephantranges (talk) 02:53, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I'd love to display the UK single, but I'm unsure whether there's much incentive... or strong fanbase to use it in lieu of the US one. Of course, you can upload the cover art if you want. (Speaking of fanbase, look at [the impact of] Madonna and her career.) George Ho (talk) 03:27, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]