Skip to table of contents · Skip to current discussions · Purge this page |
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 hereedit
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Instructions for listing files for discussion Use Twinkle. If you can't, follow these steps to do manually:
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:
Examples of what files you may request for discussion, deletion or change here:
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. |
Deletion discussions |
---|
|
Articles |
Templates and modules |
Files |
Categories |
Redirects |
Miscellany |
Speedy deletion |
Proposed deletion |
Instructions for discussion participation
editIn 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:
- Wikipedia:NFCC#1 – Free equivalent is/is not available
- Wikipedia:NFCC#8 – Significance
- Wikipedia:Non-free content#Images 2 – Unacceptable image use
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
editNominations should be processed for closing after being listed for 7 days following the steps here.
Old discussions
editThe following discussions are more than 7 days old and are pending processing by an administrator:
For older nominations, see the archives.
Discussions approaching conclusion
editDiscussions with at least 6 full days since nomination. After 7 days, they may be closed.
June 20
edit- File:Rod Stewart - Your Song.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by SnapSnap (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Cover art of modestly or less successful (or lesser known) cover recording, despite being charted, of an Elton John song. Unconvinced that the cover art improves understanding of the previously recorded song or the cover recording itself. Unconvinced that omitting this image would impact such understanding. May not contextually signify the song at all. George Ho (talk) 05:57, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep since this is a song cover of a notable cover version that if they were the original song would pass WP:GNG and WP:NSONG, charting on five national charts and two national subcharts, thus it an acceptable fair use and passes WP:NFCC#8. Aspects (talk) 23:44, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- File:Franz Ferdinand - Right Thoughts Right Words Right Action-cover.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)
Fair use album cover. Text on arrows is likely between pretty high US and wery low UK TOO (Franz Ferdinand is British band.) Michalg95 (talk) 14:19, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Re-license as "PD-ineligible-USonly" – Doesn't appear to meet the US's originality standards for copyright. Nonetheless, uncertain whether it meets UK's (low) standards, but I'll treat it as such by default. —George Ho (talk) 16:42, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Relicense as {{PD-ineligible-USonly|the United Kingdom}} per George Ho. Jonteemil (talk) 15:19, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Recent nominations
editJune 21
edit- File:Bamboozled OST.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Live and Die 4 Hip Hop (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Already one piece of non-free media on this article. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:47, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- File:Elton John - Elderberry Wine.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Vsco mike (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
This image came from a booklet page of the album Don't Shoot Me I'm Only the Piano Player: discogs, 45worlds, ebay. None of single releases use the image that also contains lyrics, which are hard to see in very small size. George Ho (talk) 09:05, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- File:Basic-math-screenshot.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Andrzejbanas (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
File should be under the threshold of originality. It is solely composed of simple text. (Oinkers42) (talk) 17:27, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Per a discussion at a previously deleted screen shot, here, I would be hesitant to include this on commons per the discussion of simple graphics and a court case Atari won through Breakout. This can be read here. Not sure if this applies, but something to consider before uploading screenshots, even of simple graphics. Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:40, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- The court case seems to be about calling the video game as a whole copyrightable, not just a screenshot. The DR seems to be about it not being used on-wiki (obviously not a problem here) and the screenshot being not from the actual game (which I am presuming this one is). (Oinkers42) (talk) 17:48, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Sure, but it seems to apply similar logic as we have for it not being within copyright. This is a weird grey area as I've said so I'm not saying its not the case here, Its just sort of a muddy area to be able to upload it here with confidence. Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:58, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- The court case seems to be about calling the video game as a whole copyrightable, not just a screenshot. The DR seems to be about it not being used on-wiki (obviously not a problem here) and the screenshot being not from the actual game (which I am presuming this one is). (Oinkers42) (talk) 17:48, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Remain as non-free – If a similar screenshot was deleted on Commons, then ineligibility for Commons transfer is assumed. Furthermore, the brown background has shades all over the edges and/or corners, making it original enough for copyright. --George Ho (talk) 18:13, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as is per the uncertainty above. Neocorelight (Talk) 04:14, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Relicense as {{PD-simple}} + {{Esoteric file}}: This screenshot is below c:COM:TOO US, which AFAICT is the country of origin. It is very simple, the shading too. The deletion request on Commons didn't have to do with copyright questions, rather if it was within Common's scope or not, so the fact that it was deleted om Commons shouldn't affect this file's license on Wikipedia at all. Even if it isn't suitable for Commons, its license on Wikipedia should still be correct, that's why we have the {{Esoteric file}} template. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonteemil (talk • contribs) 14:40, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
June 22
edit- File:Portugal national football team logo.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by S.A. Julio (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Per the note at File:Portuguese Football Federation.svg (right above #Licensing). Copying the file to another file page doesn't make any difference, it's still the same file. Jonteemil (talk) 12:26, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as per nom, this is logo of the football Federation (which has different File used) and the team article is not an appropriate use of the image as per WP:GETTY point 17. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:50, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- File:Cry Me a River sheet music 1953.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by George Ho (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Uploaded the sheet music cover in the past. Uncertain now whether it contextually signifies the song. Don't mind it deleted if no one else opposes. George Ho (talk) 14:40, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- File:Eddie Rabbit Crystal - you and i.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Canadaolympic989 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
One of non-US releases (German/Dutch: 45cat, discogs, ebay) may neither contextually signify the song nor be irreplaceable after all. A freer alternative File:You and i by eddie rabbitt and crystal gayle US single (SP copy 1).png doesn't have to be subject to NFCC, but I can't help wonder whether certain editors disagree just because cover art perceivably brands the song's release better than the side label.
Reading the article, the song was a national hit at the time... but an international flop outside North America. I don't think non-free photos of two singers seen in the cover art would improve the topic understanding much. George Ho (talk) 20:09, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- File:One by One music video.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Chrishm21 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Screenshot showing Cher in a TV set is already easy to summarize in text and may not be irreplaceable. May not contextually signify the music video that is already easy to understand in text or the whole song. Rather it merely identifies the singer in the music video, IMO. George Ho (talk) 21:17, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- File:Croatia national football team crest.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by S.A. Julio (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Per Wikipedia:Non-free content review/Archive 69#File:Croatia football federation.png. Reuploading a duplicate of the logo under a new filename doesn't make the use in child entities okay. Jonteemil (talk) 22:57, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
June 23
edit- File:I've Been Loving You - Elton John.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by JGabbard (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
De-PRODding rationale from an editor was this: I might agree that having the “Portugese EP” cover is a bit unnecessary but the single should still have visual representation in some form.
However, if visual representation is necessary, then the UK vinyl single (45cat, discogs) should be used instead of the Portuguese EP release (45cat, discogs). Furthermore, the Elton John version itself wasn't that successful, and the article may need cleanup and rewrite and/or reorganization. I'm uncertain whether visual representation of an unsuccessful version is necessary, but I still doubt it. George Ho (talk) 02:53, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- I’d agree that the UK single label would be the best choice.
- Is there a guideline which states that whether or not single art should be included is dependent on the success of said single? As far as I can tell the notability guidelines only really apply to whether or not a song should have an article dedicated to it in the first place. Elephantranges (talk) 16:03, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- The use of a non-free content isn't based on notability. Rather it's based on impact toward readers' understanding of the article topic, i.e. an Elton John song made a Canadian successful later by a Canadian band. Being contextually significant depends on
significance of the understanding afforded by the non-free content
, determined by due weight and balance, as described in WP:NFC#CS. In my view, as readers would already figure out, the Elton John version didn't chart at all, another version under different title fared a little bit better in one country, and any visual representation of the Elton John version wouldn't make much difference, especially when such representation is omitted... or deleted. Even illustrating critical commentary, an acceptable use, still wouldn't override the file's non-compliance with NFCC. George Ho (talk) 17:41, 24 June 2024 (UTC)- Makes sense. In any case I’d definitely agree that the current imagine there is pretty unneccesary. Elephantranges (talk) 19:28, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- The use of a non-free content isn't based on notability. Rather it's based on impact toward readers' understanding of the article topic, i.e. an Elton John song made a Canadian successful later by a Canadian band. Being contextually significant depends on
- File:Royal Belgian Football Association logo.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Haggis MacHaggis (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Violates WP:NFC#UUI17 as the team is a child entity of the FA and logo here is a duplicate of File:Royal Belgian FA logo 2019.svg which is the logo used on the FA's page. Jonteemil (talk) 14:01, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- File:The Logo of Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Fikku fiq (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
The same logo, uploaded under File:Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality emblem.png, is already used on Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality. The usage of the logo used on Istanbul as well is not really necessary. The omission of the logo from Istanbul would not be detrimental to a readers understanding of the topic, which is a requirement for non-free file usage. Jonteemil (talk) 14:10, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- File:Leiria22024logo.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Pietaster (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Per WP:NFC#UUI14. The same logo is already used on the 2023 European Throwing Cup. Jonteemil (talk) 14:23, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
June 24
edit- File:Dionne Warwick – A House Is Not a Home (song).jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by OriginalCyn3000 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Previously nominated for deletion eight years ago but was kept by default. The French EP sleeve (discogs) is now replaceable by this freer image: File:A house is not a home dionne warwick US single side-B.png. George Ho (talk) 02:44, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- File:China national under-23 football team.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by EtVVV (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
This is just the Chinese flag + File:China national football team.svg below it. The articles that use this file are child entities of the men's and women's national team, respectively, which use the logo without the flag. Under WP:NFC#UUI17, non-free logos of child entities may only be used if they have a seperate logo to the parent entity. I have a hard time seing that the addition of the Chinese flag above the logo would make this a seperate logo, hence I think it should be deleted per UUI17. Jonteemil (talk) 17:27, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- File:Lyndon Holland BAFTA.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Badlandssummary (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Insufficient fair use rationale. The subject is alive and is used on a video game developer page he is associated with. Spy-cicle💥 Talk? 22:38, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Fails WP:NFCC#1. ww2censor (talk) 10:11, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Per WP:NFCC#1 and WP:NFCC#8. Subject of image is alive - so would not be impossible for free image to be taken. Subject of image (person) is not subject of article (company) - so omission would not be detrimental to understanding of article on company. (Note: Rationale given speaks to "use of a low resolution screenshot from software or a website" that won't "impact the commercial viability of the software or [web]site". This rationale doesn't fit the image or its use.) Guliolopez (talk) 10:56, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
June 25
edit- File:200years.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Brian.S.W (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
The license plate contains graphic elements that are above the threshold of originality. It is not a U.S. government work as it is designed by the state of Louisiana, which does not automatically release its works into public domain. Image is not used anywhere. Ixfd64 (talk) 18:59, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
June 26
edit- File:112 Somerville Street, Andersons Bay, Dunedin.jpeg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Kiwiz1338 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
This non-free image is not the subject of any significant sourced commentary in the article. In particular, there is nothing in the article that discusses the "environment that influenced Tarrant's thoughts" as claimed in the purpose. Fails WP:NFCC#8. Whpq (talk) 03:34, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- File:Ph Philippine Archipelago.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Toto11zi (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
No forseeable use, except to apparently nullify the content of the article Treaty of Washington (1900), especially in the context of Philippine President Bongbong Marcos mentioning this treaty as a strong basis for the territorial extent of the Philippines, inclusive of disputed areas (Spratlys and Scarboroughs), Tawi-Tawi, Sulu, and some outlying islands like Tubbataha and Cagayan de Sulu (now Mapun town), which were not included in the first treaty from 1898. Map misrepresents the legal extent of the Philippine territory as per the 1898, 1900, and 1930 treaties. Map is not usable and out of scope of Wikimedia Commons so do not transfer. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:36, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- File:2023 ICC Women's T20 World Cup Asia Qualifier logo.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Crickdreamer (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
This looks to be a generic logo, not a logo specifically for the 2023 event, and thus violates WP:GETTY point 14 and WP:NFCC#8. Nothing on this logo is 2023 specific as it has no reference to the year 2023 on it. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:15, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- But it is the logo specific to the event, whether it states the year in the logo or not. The 2022 logo looks different, as far as I can tell, https://www.jagranjosh.com/current-affairs/icc-world-cup-2022-schedule-get-full-womens-world-cup-schedule-indian-team-fixtures-date-result-here-1608020469-1 MüllerMarcus (talk) 14:50, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- No, it's a generic logo used in 2023 that could be used again should the ICC choose to, as nothing ties it to 2023 only (even the sponsor could be the same in 2025, so they could use this logo again). Many similar logos with no year references have been deleted too. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:26, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep: We don't know what will happen in 2025 for sure (WP:CRYSTAL); If the same logo is used in 2025, then only we should delete it; otherwise it should be kept. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 13:33, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:41, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
June 27
edit- File:HippoCampus DemosII.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Doomsdayer520 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
non-free image, article this was attached to (Demos II) was recently blanked and made into a redirect to Hippo Campus. Free Realist 9 (talk) 01:42, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
Footer
editToday is June 27 2024. Put new nominations in Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2024 June 27 – (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 27===" 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.