Jump to content

Wikipedia:Files for discussion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:FFD)
XFD backlog
V Mar Apr May Jun Total
CfD 0 6 17 61 84
TfD 0 0 2 4 6
MfD 0 0 1 4 5
FfD 0 0 0 0 0
RfD 0 0 10 23 33
AfD 0 0 0 0 0

Files for discussion (FfD) is for listing images and other media files which may be unneeded or have either free content or non-free content usage concerns. Files that have been listed here for more than 7 days are eligible for either deletion or removal from pages if either a consensus to do so has been reached or the nominator specifically requests deletion or removal and no objections are raised. To quote the non-free content criteria, "it is the duty of users seeking to include or retain content to provide a valid rationale; those seeking to remove or delete it are not required to show that one cannot be created." For undeletion requests, first contact the administrator who deleted the file. If you are unable to resolve the issue with that administrator, the matter should be brought to deletion review.

What not to list here[edit]

  1. For concerns not listed below, if a deletion is uncontroversial, do not use this process. Instead tag a file with {{subst:prod}}. However, if the template is removed, please do not reinsert it; list the file for deletion then.
  2. For speedy deletion candidates as well, do not use this page; instead use one of the speedy deletion templates. See the criteria for speedy deletion. These are: duplicates (where both files are on Wikipedia), thumbnails, broken files, non-existent files, non-commercial, "by permission" files and files which are not an image, sound file or video clip and have no encyclopedic use.
  3. Files that have no source, have an unknown copyright, are unused or replaceable non-free, or are non-free without rationale can be marked so that they will be deleted after a week, and should not be listed on this page. Add one of the following to the file page:
    1. {{subst:nsd}} if a file has no source indicated.
    2. {{subst:nld}} if a file has a source but no licensing information.
    3. {{subst:orfud}} if a file has a non-free copyright template but isn't used in any articles.
    4. {{subst:rfu}} if a file has a non-free copyright template but could be replaced by a free file.
    5. {{subst:dfu|reason}} if a file has a non-free copyright template but the rationale isn't sufficient or is disputed.
    6. {{subst:nrd}} if a file has no non-free use rationale.
  4. Redundant or duplicate files do not have to be listed here. Please use
    1. {{db-f1|Full name of file excluding the "File:" prefix}} for speedy deletion if the other file is on Wikipedia, not on Commons
    2. {{now commons|File:NEW FILENAME}} if the file now exists on Commons, or {{now commons}} for files with the same name on Commons. (Don't nominate protected images, they are usually locally uploaded and protected since they are used in an interface message or in a highly used template, thus they are high-risk.)
  5. For blatant copyright infringements, use speedy deletion by tagging the file {{db-f9}}.
  6. If a file is listed as public domain or under a free license but lacks verification of this (either by a VRT ticket number or a notice on the source website), tag it as {{subst:npd}}.
  7. Files that are hosted on Wikimedia Commons cannot be deleted via this process. Please use the Commons deletion page instead.
  8. Description pages with no local file, even though they are in the file namespace, should not be listed here.
    1. Redirects should be treated as in any other namespace: if no speedy deletion criteria apply, they should be listed at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion.
    2. Local description pages with no associated file are speedy-deletable under criterion G8; use {{db-imagepage}}.
    3. Local description pages for files hosted on Commons are usually speedy-deletable under criterion F2 if there is no content relevant to Wikipedia; use {{db-fpcfail}}.
    4. Any other local description pages for files hosted on Commons should be listed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion.
  9. If a file is appropriately licensed and could be usable elsewhere, consider copying it to the Wikimedia Commons instead of listing it for deletion. Once copied to the Commons, it is eligible for speedy deletion per criterion 8 for files.
  10. If you are the uploader of the image, tag it with {{db-author}}.

Instructions for listing files for discussion

Use Twinkle. If you can't, follow these steps to do manually:

1
Edit the file page.

Add {{Ffd|log=2024 June 17}} to the file page.

2
Create its FfD subsection.

Follow this edit link and list the file using {{subst:Ffd2|File_name.ext|uploader=|reason=}} ~~~~

Leave the subject heading blank.

If the file has been replaced by another file, name the file that replaced it in your reason for deletion. Refer below for a list of other common reasons.

For listing additional files with the same reason, edit the first file section and use {{subst:Ffd2a|File_name.ext|Uploader=}} for each additional file. You may use this tool to quickly generate Ffd2a listings. Also, add {{Ffd|log=2024 June 17}} to the top of the file page of each file other than the first one nominated.

3
Give due notice.

Inform the uploader by adding a message to their talk page using {{subst:Ffd notice|File_name.ext}}

  • Remember to replace "File_name.ext" with the name of the image or media
  • For multiple images by the same user, use {{subst:Ffd notice multi|First_file.ext|Second_file.ext|Third_file.ext}} ~~~~ (can handle up to 26)

If the image is in use, also consider adding {{FFDC|File_name.ext|log=2024 June 17}} to the caption(s), or adding a notice to the article talk pages. Consider also notifying relevant WikiProjects of the discussion.

State the reasons why the file should be deleted, removed, or altered. Also, state what specific action should be taken, preferably in bold text; this allows discussion participants and closers to better understand the purpose of the nomination. Some examples of nomination statements include:

  • Delete. Orphaned with no foreseeable encyclopedic usage.
  • Delete. Replaced by File:FILE2.
  • Free (public domain) file may actually be eligible for copyright in the United States. This photograph was actually first published in 1931, not 1925.
  • Remove from ARTICLE1 and ARTICLE2. The file only meets WP:NFCC#8 with its use in ARTICLE3.
  • Non-free file may actually be free. This logo does not seem to meet the threshold of originality to be eligible for copyright in the United States and should actually be tagged free using {{PD-logo}}.

Examples of what files you may request for discussion, deletion or change here:

  • Obsolete – The file has been replaced by a better version.
  • Orphan – The file is not used on any pages in Wikipedia.
  • Unencyclopedic – The file doesn't seem likely to be useful in any Wikimedia project.
  • Low quality – The file is of an extremely low resolution, distorted, or has other physical image quality concerns.
  • Copyright violation – The file might be used in violation of copyright.
  • Possibly unfree – The file is claimed as a freely licensed content, but may actually be protected by copyright in either the United States or its country of origin.
  • NFCC violation – The file is used under a claim of fair use but does not meet the requirements.
  • Disputed copyright status – There is a disagreement between editors over the copyright status of a file. This includes, but is not limited to disputes about whether a file is: too simple for fair use, using the correct license tags, or accurately described by its description page.
  • Wrongly claimed as own – The file is under a self license, but the information on the file description pages suggests otherwise.

These are not the only "valid" reasons to discuss a file. Any properly explained reason can be used. The above list comprises the most common and uncontroversial ones.

If you remove a file from an article, list the article from which you removed it so there can be community review of whether the file should be deleted. This is necessary because file pages do not remember the articles on which the file were previously used.

If you have general questions about a file and/or its copyright status, then please start a new thread at Media Copyright Questions.

Instructions for discussion participation[edit]

In responding to the deletion nomination, consider adding your post in the format
* '''View''' - Reasoning ... -- ~~~~
where "Delete", "Keep", "Comment", or something else may replace "View". In posting their reasoning, many editors use abbreviations and cite to the following:

Remember that polling is not a substitute for discussion. Wikipedia's primary method of determining consensus is through editing and discussion, not voting. Although editors occasionally use straw polls in an attempt to test for consensus, polls or surveys sometimes impede rather than assist discussion. They should be used with caution, and are no more binding than any other consensus decision.

Also remember that if you believe that an image is potentially useful for other projects and should be moved to Wikimedia Commons, in lieu of responding '''Move to Commons''', you can move it there yourself. See Wikipedia:Moving files to the Commons for instructions.

Instructions for closing discussions[edit]

Nominations should be processed for closing after being listed for 7 days following the steps here.

Old discussions[edit]

The following discussions are more than 7 days old and are pending processing by an administrator:


For older nominations, see the archives.

Discussions approaching conclusion[edit]

Discussions with at least 6 full days since nomination. After 7 days, they may be closed.

June 10[edit]

File:Amaravati Government complex.jpg[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT 15:58, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Amaravati Government complex.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Ustadeditor2011 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Fails WP:NFCCP#1 pretty easy to have a free version. — DaxServer (t·m·e·c) 08:11, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete The rationale's explanations on WP:NFCC#1 and WP:NFCC#8 are both incorrect. Even if it were irreplaceable, the article is about the city and not this complex. hinnk (talk) 08:45, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The image is a poor-quality image given an unduly prominent part of a montage in the infobox of the article on the city of Amaravati. The montage would look much better without it. The rationale given at File:Amaravati Government complex.jpg says that the article as a whole is dedicated specifically to a discussion of this work. That is not true. It also claims that the image is not replaceable - but since the buildings still exist, there is nothing to stop the uploader getting a camera and taking their own photographs of the buildings.-- Toddy1 (talk) 09:35, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Always remember us single.jpg[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT 15:58, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Always remember us single.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Fma12 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Originally nominated by Sricsi (talk · contribs) in an AfD nomination, despite this being a file and not an article. Their rationale follows:

Fan-made album cover, serves no purpose

This is largely procedural on my part; I offer no opinion or further comment. WCQuidditch 10:49, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: I had uploaded the cover for the Always Remember Us This Way article, but it was removed by @GagaNutella: stating that "it was not the official cover" for the single (see edit summary).
I'm not able to discuss about that point so I can't state whether this is true or not. Probably other users give us more info about this topic. Nothing more from my part, thank you. Fma12 (talk) 15:24, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The upload was sourced from a Lady Gaga fan Twitter account, and I can find no evidence of it existing in official sources. No single release on Spotify, Apple Music, or Tidal. A Star Is Born (2018 soundtrack) says it was a radio-only single in Europe, and I doubt it would have unique cover art in that case. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 16:11, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:BTS - Idol (from Love Yourself - Answer).ogg[edit]

File:BTS - Idol (from Love Yourself - Answer).ogg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Nairb.Idi9 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This non-free audio file samples ~13% of a copyrighted musical recording, in violation of both WP:NFCC#3b (minimal extent of use) and WP:SAMPLE. JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 14:52, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and tag as {{non-free reduce}}. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 16:14, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not delete this audio file as some people need it to hear the song and hear the instruments that were mentioned under "composition". Just because you think it's an example of illiteracy doesn't mean it is, people really do need it. 41.114.190.152 (talk) 14:05, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep 41.114.190.152 (talk) 14:06, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – Not solely on length. The assumption that readers won't understand one of the Korean songs without this sample screams assumption of illiteracy, IMO. Reading the article, readers would already figure out it's a Korean song, and uses of music from other cultures would be already understood, even when description about the whole music within the "Composition" section is brief yet concise.

    Compare samples to screenshots: they still need to contextually signify respective topics in question. If omitting this sample doesn't impact the understanding of the song, then the sample may not be contextually significant after all. George Ho (talk) 20:01, 12 June 2024 (UTC); edited, 16:16, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Your comment is very insensitive because you cannot assume that one is illiterate only off of a song sample.
    I say keep 41.114.190.152 (talk) 14:09, 13 June 2024 (UTC) Double vote by editor using this IP (41.114.190.152). George Ho (talk) 18:20, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:MegalovaniaShort.ogg[edit]

File:MegalovaniaShort.ogg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by NegativeMP1 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This non-free audio file samples ~16% of a copyrighted musical recording, in violation of both WP:NFCC#3b (minimal extent of use) and WP:SAMPLE. JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 14:59, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I uploaded this audio file before I knew about WP:SAMPLE. I'll upload a reduced version (which should be about 0:15 seconds, since the Undertale version is half a minute longer than the original recording) when I get home. P.S. this file clearly has a purpose, and should not have been listed for deletion. λ NegativeMP1 15:15, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If I may, the above assertion regarding the length per WP:SAMPLE is based on the time in the infobox, which is the duration of the original version. The version illustrated from Undertale is [[1]] is 2 minutes 36 seconds in length (additionally verified by the wikia here short of ripping it from the OST itself). Would it be viable to use a 23 second clip with this in consideration, so it can go past the opening section?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:21, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and tag as {{non-free reduce}}. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 16:14, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and reduce length per Kung Fu Man, preferably with a sourced caption added in the article to increase the sample's viability under criterion 8 of the NFCC. TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:23, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 01:24, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Who is above though? 39.50.245.89 (talk) 12:54, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove from Sans (Undertale). The sample might or might not enhance readers' understanding of a video game character, but I'm unconvinced that omitting it from the character article would impact such understanding, especially now that the instrumental itself has its own article. Furthermore, there's already a character image as the lead image. Why is the sample needed other than some mere character association? (Even I don't see why a sample of the Super Mario Bros. theme should be used in the Mario article.) George Ho (talk) 20:12, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove from Sans (Undertale). Upon careful examination, I fail to identify any logical justification or significant purpose for the inclusion of this particular file within the context of the article. Moreover, its presence could potentially be perceived as a violation of the Wikipedia guideline on trivial content, commonly referred to as WP:Fancruft. It is worth noting that in the age of easily accessible online platforms like YouTube, where users can readily listen to the song in question, the necessity of embedding this file becomes increasingly questionable. From the perspective of maintaining a high standard of encyclopedic quality, the file in question may not offer substantial value to the general readership but rather be considered extraneous information or "cruft" in this context. Consequently, given its limited relevance and potential diversion from the primary objective of delivering informative and educational content, a strong case can be made for the removal of this file from the article to enhance the overall reader experience and uphold the integrity of the information presented. 39.50.245.89 (talk) 12:51, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kinunot na Isdang Tuna1.jpg[edit]

File:Kinunot na Isdang Tuna1.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Valenzuela400 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Better image is File:Kinunot na Isdang Tuna2.jpg. Instance of use here now replaced. This inferior version of the image of the dish can be deleted as unused and WP:NOTFILESTORAGE. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 23:57, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Transfer to Commons If rotated and cropped, this is of comparable quality. hinnk (talk) 00:31, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Hinnk don't you think it will be c:COM:REDUNDANT to File:Kinunot na Isdang Tuna2.jpg? JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:03, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    My take on it would be that they aren't redundant since neither's clearly inferior, or at least the first could be adjusted so it wouldn't be. (I myself tend to upload an extra photo or two of the same subject so editors can have some discretion, excited to find out if I've been doing it wrong this whole time!) hinnk (talk) 03:25, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recent nominations[edit]

June 11[edit]

File:National Anthem of North Korea Instrumental.mp3[edit]

File:National Anthem of North Korea Instrumental.mp3 (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Noctawny (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

No evidence of PD per Public_domain_in_the_United_States#Sound_recordings. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 00:03, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Manggahan High School4.jpg[edit]

File:Manggahan High School4.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Valenzuela400 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

English Wikipedia is not an indefinite file storage of unencyclopedic subjects as per WP:NOTFILESTORAGE. Not worth it to be transferred to Commons because this may be out of c:COM:Project scope. Commons has many images of publicity adverts of public infrastructure projects by Philippine government agencies and instrumentalities like File:Ubihan farm-to-market road and steel bridge 49.jpg, File:0024jfConstruction Arterial Road BypassTambubong Caingin San Rafael Bulacanfvf 20.jpg, and File:9915Balagtas Municipal Hall Bulacan 04.jpg. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:20, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pasig Rainforest Park7.jpg[edit]

File:Pasig Rainforest Park7.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Valenzuela400 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

May be a derivative work of a character or c:COM:TOYS. For sure, the owner, the Pasig City government, is not the license holder of the underlying copyright of the depicted train (toy/character); in accordance with c:COM:Philippines#Government works. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:29, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 07:36, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mother boxart.png[edit]

File:Mother boxart.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Parrothead1983 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Fails WP:NFCC#1 due to File:MOTHER 1989 Boxart (Nintendo).png. (Oinkers42) (talk) 17:01, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have my doubts that the one on Commons is in the public domain. The uploader of the Commons image is indeffed here for being a sock. SWinxy (talk) 21:44, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I thought that account name looked familiar. Regardless, the image seems to simply be a combination of already PD Simple assets and this image, which seems to be a derivative work of this NASA image with very little changed about it. (Oinkers42) (talk) 16:04, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep At least for now, as the copyright status of the Commons version is unclear and was uploaded by a known disruptive editor. I have nominated it for deletion on Commons. If there is consensus to keep the Commons version, I would have no problem with a new discussion leading to deletion. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 07:23, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Twitter example share icon.png[edit]

File:Twitter example share icon.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Crookesmoor (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Fails WP:NFCC#1: no free equivalent. There are plenty of tweets on Commons, and it's possible to use the icon SVG alone. SWinxy (talk) 21:05, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Both of those alternatives would be better than a random Museum of English Rural Life tweet. Big sheep, though. hinnk (talk) 01:31, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Facebook share icon example.png[edit]

File:Facebook share icon example.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Crookesmoor (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Fails WP:NFCC#1: no free equivalent. This can be replaced with a freely-licensed image on Commons that has the share icon, or replace it with an SVG of the icon itself. SWinxy (talk) 21:12, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 12[edit]

File:Hyderabad skyline durgam cheruvu.jpeg[edit]

File:Hyderabad skyline durgam cheruvu.jpeg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Ustadeditor2011 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Fails WP:NFCC#1DaxServer (t·m·e·c) 10:05, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. This is a picture of the Durgam Cheruvu Bridge in Hyderabad, but article on the Durgam Cheruvu Bridge has an entirely satisfactory image of the bridge. The rationale given for non-free use is for the article on the city of Hyderabad, and says For visual identification of the object of the article. The article as a whole is dedicated specifically to a discussion of this work. Any derivative work based upon the artwork would be a copyright violation, so creation of a free image is not possible. The file will be used only in the Infobox. None of which is relevant to its possible use in the infobox on the article on the city of Hyderabad.-- Toddy1 (talk) 11:27, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as replaceable with anything in c:Category:Durgam Cheruvu Cable Bridge or c:Category:Views of Hyderabad, India. hinnk (talk) 17:49, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hyderabad skyline Khajaguda.jpeg[edit]

File:Hyderabad skyline Khajaguda.jpeg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Ustadeditor2011 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Fails WP:NFCC#1DaxServer (t·m·e·c) 10:05, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. This is a picture of the skyline and the Khajaguda Lake in Hyderabad. The rationale given for non-free use is for the article on the city of Hyderabad, and says For visual identification of the object of the article. The article as a whole is dedicated specifically to a discussion of this work. Any derivative work based upon the artwork would be a copyright violation, so creation of a free image is not possible. The file is used only in the infobox to depict city landscape. This has little relevance to its possible use in the infobox on the article on the city of Hyderabad. There are far more good photographs of Hyderabad on Commons than we could possibly use in the article on the city. As for the article on the Khajaguda Lake; it already has an entirely satisfactory photograph in the infobox.-- Toddy1 (talk) 11:27, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as replaceable with anything in c:Category:Khajaguda Lake or c:Category:Views of Hyderabad, India. hinnk (talk) 17:50, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:HavocinHeaven1964.jpg[edit]

File:HavocinHeaven1964.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Benjwong (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

The copyright of this film or TV work expired in 2015. Please use {{PD-China-film}} to replace the original fair use label. Fumikas Sagisavas (talk) 11:27, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The upload comment mentions "re-uploaded lower res pic". Was there a higher resolution version that could be restored? hinnk (talk) 18:04, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Matrix. The copyright in China hadn't expired by 1996, so it would still be under copyright in the U.S. Should probably be tagged as {{PD-China|subsist}}. hinnk (talk) 18:50, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as non-free per URAA, the copyright in the US will only expire on (1964+96) = 2060. —Matrix(!) {user - talk? - uselesscontributions} 18:30, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Luang Pu Bunleua Sulilat as a young man.jpg[edit]

File:Luang Pu Bunleua Sulilat as a young man.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by InMemoriamLuangPu (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Unsure if PD but definitely not a CC-licensed file. Seems a tad redundant to File:Luang Pu Bunleua Sulilat.png to be converted to a fair use file. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 15:09, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as {{No image source}}. hinnk (talk) 17:56, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Know Your Enemy 2022 version.jpg[edit]

File:Know Your Enemy 2022 version.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by The wub (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

There's already an album cover at the article, a second one doesn't significantly improve contextual understanding per WP:NFCC8. —Matrix(!) {user - talk? - uselesscontributions} 18:09, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, the 2022 version cover is significantly different from the original release (as is the album content itself). So inclusion meets NFCC8 by allowing this version of the album to be identified, and its omission would be detrimental to understanding. Where alternative covers are significantly different this is a commonly accepted use. Quoting Template:Infobox album#Template:Extra album cover: If the album has been released with different album covers, they can be added to the infobox using this template. However, per WP:NFCC#3 use of non-free content is to be minimal, and not to be used if one item can convey equivalent significant information. An alternative cover that is significantly different from the original and is widely distributed and/or replaces the original has generally been held to pass this criterion. the wub "?!" 17:11, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the omission would be detrimental to the user's understanding, but we also have to balance the idea that the minimum amount of fair use material should be used on Wikipedia. You quoted that it must be significantly different, however both covers use the same style, and the background image is the same barring the colours. There is not that big of a difference that would leave a reader confused IMO. —Matrix(!) {user - talk? - uselesscontributions} 18:25, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The background image isn't the same, it has different patterns and completely different text. the wub "?!" 10:37, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral – Sure, the 2022 cover looks different from the original, but I don't think it's a sufficient reason to keep the alternative cover. On the other hand, the 2022 release was reworked or remastered or remixed (whatever you call it) and expanded as the double album as originally intended. I thought about originally voting "delete" because the alternative cover doesn't provide info substantially different from the other. However, differences between original and 2022 releases seen much greater than I thought, and deleting the alternative cover would leave readers much curious or assuming that the standard cover art is also used for the 2022 release. —George Ho (talk) 18:04, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 23:41, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 13[edit]

File:Janus Records logo.jpg[edit]

File:Janus Records logo.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Zeddedm (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

The shape may seem unusual, but it's easier to draw with a ruler or stencil or any other precisive material. Also, it's American-made most likely. Should be transferred to Commons if no objections to tag the logo as free to use. George Ho (talk) 04:51, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relicense: No clear precedence why it is copyrightable or evidence of copyrightable elements. Kys5g talk! 13:42, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In other words, a unique shape of the logo isn't original enough for copyright, right? George Ho (talk) 16:41, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, as long as it does not have any complex elements. Kys5g talk! 09:23, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Slade-lets-dance-1988-remix-cheapskate-s.jpg[edit]

File:Slade-lets-dance-1988-remix-cheapskate-s.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Ajsmith141 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Recently tagged as free to use in the US. Unsure whether it's copyrighted in the UK. Should still be {{PD-ineligible-USonly}} by default if no replies have been made. George Ho (talk) 21:10, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Medusa-ClashofTitans.jpg[edit]

File:Medusa-ClashofTitans.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by TAnthony (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

May not contextually signify both the Clash of the Titans (1981 film) and cultural depictions of Medusa and Gorgons. Plenty of Medusa depictions in pop culture, especially films. No indication that one depiction is more significant than any other. George Ho (talk) 21:15, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete from both per WP:NFCC#8. No substantial discussion of Medusa's appearance in Clash of the Titans (1981 film), except a mention of all the creatures made with stop-motion animation. It's not doing much in Cultural depictions of Medusa and Gorgons, and I've added a PD image to replace it in illustrating the "Screen" section. hinnk (talk) 01:41, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I don't think NFCC#8 supports deletion, because the depiction does help the reader visualize what is described; and the claim that there's no substantial discussion is clearly wrong, since the description explains not only how Medusa was realized, but also how that depiction differs from other versions. Clash of the Titans is a culturally-significant film, more so than most of the other examples (certainly more than a blurry image from a 1925 silent picture that hardly anybody alive has seen), and as such it benefits readers to have illustrations. The image is small and unlikely to infringe on any rights held by the film's copyright holder, or anyone else who might have copyright on the character or image. P Aculeius (talk) 08:01, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The most substantive discussion of Medusa in both articles, is as P Aculeius says, about how her portrayal differs from other versions. In particular it discusses how the CoT Medusa has "the lower body of a snake rather than legs", which isn't shown in the illustration! To argue that it passes NFCC#8 I would expect an image to illustrate the one visually distinctive thing about the character actually discussed in the article. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 08:14, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Agree with Caecilius. Ifly6 (talk) 05:06, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 14[edit]

File:Oil portrait of Alexander Buchan, before 1769.png[edit]

File:Oil portrait of Alexander Buchan, before 1769.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Kusma (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Non-free file may actually be free. From what the uploader provided, this painting is likely 18th century, so {{PD-old-assumed}} would apply even though the author is unknown. Wikiacc () 03:05, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The image was earlier discussed here, where Kusma wrote: "as it was first published in 1979, it may be protected by copyright". Note also that the 1979 publication was in the United Kingdom, not the United States. So I doubt this work was eligible for restoration under the URAA, but this is worth discussing. Wikiacc () 03:12, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikimedia Commons would probably accept this image based on sloppy interpretation of rules, but I see no evidence that it is PD. From c:Commons:Copyright rules by territory/United Kingdom, it seems to be in copyright in the UK until 2029 or 2049, and it was not PD in 1996. —Kusma (talk) 05:09, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, unless we can establish either that the painting was in fact published before 1979, or the identity of the artist, under the UK's bizarre copyright rules it remains in copyright until 2049 here. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 10:46, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The other alternative would be that it was never published at all; This is because publication requires the consent of the copyright holder. So it is unlikely that it having been made available to the public in 1979 counts as publication. This would render it {{PD-US-unpublished}}. Felix QW (talk) 12:25, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This reasoning only applies to the US, of course, but that is good enough for a local file. Felix QW (talk) 13:10, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The painting was (and I think still is) owned by relatives of Alexander Buchan, who appear to have been involved in the 1979 publication and are also the most likely potential copyright holders. —Kusma (talk) 13:43, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Back in My Arms Again.ogg[edit]

File:Back in My Arms Again.ogg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by FrickFrack (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Doesn't contextually signify the song. Doesn't justify reason that omitting this file would detriment understanding of the whole song. George Ho (talk) 22:18, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 15[edit]

File:Unchained Melody 1955 sheet music.jpg[edit]

File:Unchained Melody 1955 sheet music.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by George Ho (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

I uploaded a sheet music cover of Unchained Melody as the lead/infobox image, but I've wondered recently whether it's needed and compliant with NFCC, especially "contextual significance" criterion. If not, then I won't object its deletion. George Ho (talk) 04:08, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:On The Radio (Belgium).jpg[edit]

File:On The Radio (Belgium).jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Karldaviesfan (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Displaying at least two releases may fail WP:NFCC#3a. This is a Belgian release (Discogs) and is a reverse version of the parent compilation album's front cover. Should use the other image (File:On the radio donna summer US single variant A.png) instead. George Ho (talk) 05:12, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Starship Versions.jpeg[edit]

File:Starship Versions.jpeg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Thistheyear2023 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Non-free file being used as fair use, but missing fair use rationale box (not completely required) and the rationale provided is incomplete (missing WP:NFCCP#10c). This file does not meet WP:NFCCP#8 "Contextual Significance" - it is not necessary to enhance the reader's understanding of the versions of the SpaceX Starship; the different sized rockets can be visualized based on the article's content and the data could be summarized without needing to show this slide. Consigned (talk) 15:15, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The table has already been swapped out in SpaceX Starship#Versions (WP:NFCCP#7 fell). I've also found a transparent higher-res version of Starship V3 in an FAA publication, so WP:NFCCP#1 is gone too now since a V2 graphic could be created from File:Starship stack V3.png. HLFan (talk) 14:58, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Zobel (14) Balanced Bridge T.PNG[edit]

File:Zobel (14) Balanced Bridge T.PNG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Spinningspark (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

File is on Commons with the same name but have a keep local. However the uploader that added the keep local is deceased and therefore not active anymore. So the reason for the keep local no longer exist. It was suggested on Wikipedia:Files_for_discussion/2024_April_24#File:4-cube_4^4.png that files are deleted via a PROD. But the file was proposed for deletion in 2009 so I can’t do a PROD. Back then it was suggested to delete because it was obsolete and replaced by an svg. It was kept because uploader requested and it was used as a source for the svg. Now the file is moved to Commons so there is no longer any issue in deleting the file. MGA73 (talk) 19:06, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Zobel (15) Balanced Zobel half section.PNG[edit]

File:Zobel (15) Balanced Zobel half section.PNG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Spinningspark (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

File is on Commons with the same name but have a keep local. However the uploader that added the keep local is deceased and therefore not active anymore. So the reason for the keep local no longer exist. It was suggested on Wikipedia:Files_for_discussion/2024_April_24#File:4-cube_4^4.png that files are deleted via a PROD. But the file was proposed for deletion in 2009 so I can’t do a PROD. Back then it was suggested to delete because it was obsolete and replaced by an svg. It was kept because uploader requested and it was used as a source for the svg. Now the file is moved to Commons so there is no longer any issue in deleting the file. MGA73 (talk) 19:07, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 16[edit]

File:Sgtpepperslonelyheartsclubbandsinglecover.jpg[edit]

File:Sgtpepperslonelyheartsclubbandsinglecover.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by ChillyPepper (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

The front sleeve of the 1978 single release looks similar to the Beatles' parent album Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, but it's no longer used in the song article. It's currently used in With a Little Help from My Friends, but to me, its ability to contextually signify the whole song isn't clear. More convincing images would've been ones associated with the song, like the song title itself: e.g. a back cover or a side label of the release itself (45cat), or a side label of another (45cat). George Ho (talk) 07:07, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:With a Little Help from My Friends by Joe Cocker UK vinyl single Side-A.png[edit]

File:With a Little Help from My Friends by Joe Cocker UK vinyl single Side-A.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by George Ho (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

As I'm beginning to believe, the whole side label may have elements that aren't "original" enough for US copyright. Nonetheless, it may or may not be "original" enough for the (longtime) UK copyright. Should be "PD-ineligible-USonly" if no consensus has yet decided to transfer it to Commons. George Ho (talk) 07:11, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:NSDL Payments Bank Logo.png[edit]

File:NSDL Payments Bank Logo.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Iamsouravrana (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Non-fee logo claimed to be used for identification in the infobox at the top of the article but is instead in a secondary infobox at the bottom of the article. The logo is not the subject of any sourced significant critical commentary. Fails WP:NFCC#8. Whpq (talk) 17:43, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:EricRudolphMugshots2003.jpg[edit]

File:EricRudolphMugshots2003.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Comitialbulb561 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Fails WP:NFCCP criterion 8, specifically the article does not need a photo for the reader to be able to understand that when captured Rudolph had dyed hair and a moustache, since text alone does that perfectly well. Article already contains a free imasge of Rudolph Kathleen's bike (talk) 20:03, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 17[edit]

File:Canadian Soccer Association logo.svg[edit]

File:Canadian Soccer Association logo.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Carniolus (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This is the logo of the Canadian Soccer Association, not the national soccer teams themselves, thus this image cannot be used on the team articles. We have had many similar FFDs for sports association logos with consensus that they can't be used on team articles (WP:GETTY point 17). The CSA page is using a different version of this image, thus this version does not need to be kept, as it has no valid uses Joseph2302 (talk) 15:49, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Footer[edit]

Today is June 17 2024. Put new nominations in Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2024 June 17 – (new nomination)

If the current date's page has been started without the header, apply {{subst:Ffd log}} to the top of the day's page.

Please ensure "===June 17===" is at the very top of the new page so that internal page links from the main Files for discussion page (the one you're on now) work.

The page Wikipedia:Files for discussion/Today will always show today's log.