Wikipedia:Files for discussion
![]() | 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 here[edit]
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
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
[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:
- 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
[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:
- File:Juan izquierdo en cndef.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Fma12 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
No evidence this meets WP:NFCC#1. This person played 115 matches, and so anyone at any of those matches could licence us a photo. Also, NFCC#1 justification on the non-free template is incorrectly listed as for visual identification of the person in question, at the top of his/her biographical article
- which is not a valid reason for this criteria. We shouldn't be just farming images off the Internet just after people die when free images of public figures could be obtained. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:37, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I've seen that games in some South American countries are covered by national press agencies who release the photos into free use. As he played in continental championships, there's a possibility there could be multiple images available. Also, he was at one of the big two teams in Uruguay, a football crazy country - even if his appearances were low, surely fans would see him at training, on the bench, outside the ground? Compared to when I've uploaded files for 1960s players, the chances of a free replacement here are high. Unknown Temptation (talk) 12:23, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Could not possibly have exhausted options for a free alternative just a day after his death. Wikipedia:Example requests for permission can be used to ask photographers for permission.—Bagumba (talk) 12:44, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Izquierdo had been a professional footballer since 2018. If any free image of him has been found to date, what makes you think that it will magically appear? I've done a search on Commons database (specifically in categories of teams where Izquierdo played such as players of Peñarol, or players of Nacional, and even in Uruguay national team starting line ups with no successful result.
- I think that leaving the photograph there until a free image can be found (if that happens), would be the most reasonable decision. Fma12 (talk) 15:26, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Do you think every free photograph in human history has been uploaded to Commons? He played for Uruguay's big two - the equivalent of playing for Celtic and Rangers in Scotland, a country of similar population, football fandom and big team domination. So yes, I do think that many people in Uruguay have a photo of him, either at a game, training, fan event, trophy celebration etc. that they could upload just like many millions of other players. He was a key player when Liverpool Montevideo won their first league title in over a century - did nobody go to the parade? Unknown Temptation (talk) 16:00, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- You continue talking about suppositions, no real facts. There are loads of key players with no free images of them available for use, wheter they are notable or not. Fma12 (talk) 17:12, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Still not a policy based argument. Facts? It's a fact no fan ever took one photo of him, ever? Do people not have mobile phones in Uruguay? This was not the Loch Ness Monster, this was a player for the two biggest clubs, a title winner at a third club, and someone who played away at huge grounds in South America. Unknown Temptation (talk) 06:53, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- There are a lot of footballers that have played for some of the greatest clubs in the world and there is not a single licensed-free image of them. I can guess you're Uruguayan, aren't you? because your arguments are based on a fan's point of view rather than a neutral one.
- Izquierdo played for Peñarol and Nacional, it's true. But he was not notable (in terms of fame or repercussion) like Francescoli or Cavani (just to name two examples) so finding free photographs of him could not be as easy as you suppose. Fma12 (talk) 18:09, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Still not a policy based argument. Facts? It's a fact no fan ever took one photo of him, ever? Do people not have mobile phones in Uruguay? This was not the Loch Ness Monster, this was a player for the two biggest clubs, a title winner at a third club, and someone who played away at huge grounds in South America. Unknown Temptation (talk) 06:53, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- You continue talking about suppositions, no real facts. There are loads of key players with no free images of them available for use, wheter they are notable or not. Fma12 (talk) 17:12, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Do you think every free photograph in human history has been uploaded to Commons? He played for Uruguay's big two - the equivalent of playing for Celtic and Rangers in Scotland, a country of similar population, football fandom and big team domination. So yes, I do think that many people in Uruguay have a photo of him, either at a game, training, fan event, trophy celebration etc. that they could upload just like many millions of other players. He was a key player when Liverpool Montevideo won their first league title in over a century - did nobody go to the parade? Unknown Temptation (talk) 16:00, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Marc Vivien Foe was also a player who played in the top flight of a very popular league and played for their national team yet no one uploaded a free picture of him yet, Manute Bol was a basketball sensation and legend and his wiki still has a fair use image, same to Tupac, same to Biggie. It doesn't really make sense why we are discussing fantastical situations where we should ask every person who attended a game where Izquierdo was in and ask for permission if they took a photo of him. We can wait and eventually a free picture may appear (this happened in Selena Quintanilla page) but as of now, the Fair Use rationale is ok, maybe just change the wording to better comply with NFCC#1. Hyperba21 (talk) 17:31, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- This is what I have been trying to explain since the beginning.... If there is any free image of a dead person, what is the problem with uploading a NFCC one? Or should we wait indefinitely to someone upload a photograph? Discussing such a thing is really a waste of time. Fma12 (talk) 18:13, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per Hyperba21. Plenty of famous people have no known free images available. We don't define any kind of standard around how famous someone was during their life that we can assume there must be free images available, and I don't think we should, considering how subjective that is. Fma12's argument makes more sense to me than Bagumba's—we shouldn't be presuming that no search was made during Izquierdo's lifetime, and a free image isn't significantly more likely to appear for a person whose death was recent. Instead of trying to define some kind of WP:BDP-like period after someone dies, we should require an actual replacement image be provided. hinnk (talk) 08:02, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- File:Nintendo 64 Logo.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by KUsam (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Fails WP:FREER#Multiple restrictions: vector format non-free logo from Brands of the World Wcam (talk) 14:05, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- File:CFL CAL Jersey 1989.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Cmm3 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
This file was deemed non-free in Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2024 July 8#File:CFL CAL Jersey 1989.png because of the logo on the helmet. The purpuse of use is To illustrate the jerseys worn by the team. I don't think that's an acceptable use of non-free content so either delete or remove the logo from the helmet and hide previous versions with the logo on the helmet. Jonteemil (talk) 10:59, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
- File:Philippine Arena (Bocaue, PHI).JPG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by IronGargoyle (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Not a good image of the Philippine Arena, obscured by trees. Poor representation of the arena. The only instance of use, at Bulacan article, will be replaced by File:Philippine Arena - Front View (Ciudad De Victoria, Bocaue, Bulacan)(2014-10-19).jpg shortly after this nomination. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 23:15, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. The suggested replacement is fine, but not a whole image of the stadium. I understand that English Wikipedia is not a file repository, but given that the original is deleted from Commons, having a limited selection of images of {{FoP-USonly}} buildings provides a source for future editorial choice. IronGargoyle (talk) 01:01, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- @IronGargoyle we already have too many images of this stadium, mainly from Patrickroque01. I'll mention the following files from him:
- File:Ph-bulacan-bocaue-philippine arena front.jpeg
- File:Philippine Arena - side view (Bocaue, Bulacan)(2019-05-05).jpg
- File:Philippine Arena - front (Bocaue, Bulacan; 05-05-2019).jpg
- File:Philippine Arena - front view (Bocaue, Bulacan)(2019-05-05).jpg
- File:Philippine Arena - front, SEAG opening (Bocaue, Bulacan; 11-30-2019).jpg
- File:Philippine Arena - night view, SEAG opening (Bocaue, Bulacan; 11-30-2019).jpg
- File:Philippine Arena - Distant View (Ciudad De Victoria, Bocaue, Bulacan)(2014-10-19).jpg (this is closer to the file I nominated)
- With seven images of this stadium, plus the image I suggested, it is already more than enough to illustrate enwiki. Enwiki is not an indefinite file hosting service, notwithstanding the local exemption doctrine (WP:FOP is inferior to WP:NOTFILESTORAGE). I think these images are enough and there is no need for more images of this stadium (unless the stadium's appearance is altered sometime in the future). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:44, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- The nominated image does a good job of capturing the juxtaposition of stadium and surrounding ecology. None of the images you cite do that. I will add that your note saying WP:FOP is inferior to WP:NOTFILESTORAGE is misleading, as WP:NOTFILESTORAGE explicitly allows files which could be used in articles. I don't think we're maxed out on potential usage when talking about the world's largest indoor arena. Nine images are not that many, and many of the ones you cite are much more similar to one another than the nominated image. IronGargoyle (talk) 02:00, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- @IronGargoyle the boilerplate notice on top of WP:FOP explicitly states it is not a policy, so it is still inferior to WP:NOTFILESTORAGE: "This is an information page. It is not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines; rather, its purpose is to explain certain aspects of Wikipedia's norms, customs, technicalities, or practices. It may reflect differing levels of consensus and vetting." It should first be made as a policy for it to complement with WP:NOTFILESTORAGE. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:21, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I am aware of the difference between a policy and an information page. Thank you. I am saying that the policy page explicitly endorses unused but potentially usable images like this. IronGargoyle (talk) 02:25, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- @IronGargoyle the boilerplate notice on top of WP:FOP explicitly states it is not a policy, so it is still inferior to WP:NOTFILESTORAGE: "This is an information page. It is not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines; rather, its purpose is to explain certain aspects of Wikipedia's norms, customs, technicalities, or practices. It may reflect differing levels of consensus and vetting." It should first be made as a policy for it to complement with WP:NOTFILESTORAGE. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:21, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- The nominated image does a good job of capturing the juxtaposition of stadium and surrounding ecology. None of the images you cite do that. I will add that your note saying WP:FOP is inferior to WP:NOTFILESTORAGE is misleading, as WP:NOTFILESTORAGE explicitly allows files which could be used in articles. I don't think we're maxed out on potential usage when talking about the world's largest indoor arena. Nine images are not that many, and many of the ones you cite are much more similar to one another than the nominated image. IronGargoyle (talk) 02:00, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- @IronGargoyle we already have too many images of this stadium, mainly from Patrickroque01. I'll mention the following files from him:
- File:Metro-epektaseis.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Sfera1022 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Uncertain whether the uploader and the copyright holder are the same person as claimed. Claim of the map being copyrighted or public domain uncertain yet. George Ho (talk) 20:01, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment If the Greek PD copyright tag is correct then who the uploader is would seem to be irrelevant. The question is thus whether the copyright tag is correct. I can't find the original source, but the same image has been used by what seems like every Greek newspaper and website reporting about the Thessaloniki Metro so it's certainly not the original work of the source website. None of the articles I looked at gave credit, so unless that's common in Greek media the claim of the PD seems very likely. I can't find the map on the website of the organisation our article says is responsible for the Metro, so they don't seem to be the source, but obviously that doesn't tell us who is. Thryduulf (talk) 16:22, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:42, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nom's comment – Default to delete if no one else opposes. George Ho (talk) 01:03, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- Why? Thryduulf (talk) 19:12, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
- Do you oppose deletion then? Normally, nominated files without at least one input still have been deleted. George Ho (talk) 19:31, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
- In this case, I'm still uncertain whether the map belongs to the officials. I'm just now defaulting to treating the file as unfree at this time and can assume that the map fails NFCC technically. George Ho (talk) 19:33, 27 August 2024 (UTC) (Unstruck, 08:55, 31 August 2024 (UTC))
- Keep. Having done some more searching I've found two sources that credit the image to the Ministry of Infrastructure and Transport (Greece) (Υπουργείο Υποδομών και Μεταφορών). One of those sources is definitely unreliable (a forum), but the other Gazzetta appears to be reliable (but it's never been discussed at RSN). While it is certainly plausible for that agency to be producing maps of transport infrastructure projects in Greece I've not been able to immediately find it on their website (yme.gr), but I did find [1] which includes images very clearly from the same presentation shown in the Gazzetta article (both articles were published on 20 May, which is also the earliest date Google has for any copy of the image). On the balance of probabilities at least I am satisfied that the Ministry is the source for the image. I haven't verified whether the PD license applies to works of government departments, but given the widespread usage by Greek media it seems very likely. Thryduulf (talk) 02:06, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
Changing my stance to more likely PD as Greek government work per above evidence. George Ho (talk) 07:50, 29 August 2024 (UTC) Nom's comment, 07:52, 29 August 2024 (UTC)- @Thryduulf and George Ho: Which license exactly? {{PD-GreekGov}} only applies to texts. ✗plicit 08:39, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Having done some more searching I've found two sources that credit the image to the Ministry of Infrastructure and Transport (Greece) (Υπουργείο Υποδομών και Μεταφορών). One of those sources is definitely unreliable (a forum), but the other Gazzetta appears to be reliable (but it's never been discussed at RSN). While it is certainly plausible for that agency to be producing maps of transport infrastructure projects in Greece I've not been able to immediately find it on their website (yme.gr), but I did find [1] which includes images very clearly from the same presentation shown in the Gazzetta article (both articles were published on 20 May, which is also the earliest date Google has for any copy of the image). On the balance of probabilities at least I am satisfied that the Ministry is the source for the image. I haven't verified whether the PD license applies to works of government departments, but given the widespread usage by Greek media it seems very likely. Thryduulf (talk) 02:06, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Crap, I misread the tag. Reading c:COM:NOP Greece and the rest of the page, I couldn't find a suitable Commons tag that would label the map as free. Rather I now go for unfree by default again. Uncertain whether it meets NFCC, but the infobox has hidden/collapsed the map, which may affect the map's compliance with NFCC. George Ho (talk) 08:55, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Explicit: To me it looks like it does apply here. "[T]here is no copyright protection for official texts [...] nor for expressions of folklore, news information or simple facts and data." Emphasis mine. ~ Argenti Aertheri(Chat?) 22:26, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- The maps are more than just "simple facts and data". Maps require high intuition and skill, especially to perfect proximity and whatevs. As I see, the map looks very complex expressively, even if it's not artwork or... How do you call it? George Ho (talk) 22:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, now I'm not sure. Near as I can tell the copyright holder is the government, but unless someone who can read Greek comes along, dropping the relevant law here is all I've got: Η προστασία του παρόντος νόμου δεν εκτείνεται σε επίσημα κείμενα με τα οποία εκφράζεται η άσκηση πολιτειακής αρμοδιότητας και ιδίως σε νομοθετικά, διοικητικά ή δικαστικά κείμενα, καθώς και στις εκφράσεις της λαϊκής παράδοσης, στις ειδήσεις και στα απλά γεγονότα ή στοιχεία. Unless a Greek speaker comes along to say otherwise I'm going to have to agree with you. ~ Argenti Aertheri(Chat?) 01:51, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- IMO it depends whether what Google is translating as "texts" is being used to mean "works" or specifically "textual works", both seem equally plausible - especially as Google offers an alternative translation as "official documents". Commons:Category:PD Greece contains lots of images, including maps, but that's not a guarantee the tag is being used correctly. Looking through the Commons deletion requests that link to the tag, all there were deleted were for reasons that don't help us here (e.g. not actually (or not certainly) works of the Greek government). Indeed the only deletion request there that I've found that appears relevant is Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hellenic Coast Guard flag Rethymno.jpg, which was kept, but a photograph of a flag and a map are different enough that the precedent might or might not be relevant. Thryduulf (talk) 02:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Well I feel a bit silly: it's a map which means {{PD-map}} is the right license. ~ Argenti Aertheri(Chat?) 03:52, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Hmm... Dunno whether the court decision in a US case applies to non-US maps also. (By the way, an appellate court decision can be overturned by the Supreme Court. *ugh*) Commons insists that a work be free in both the source country and the US. Haven't seen yet a Greek court case about maps. George Ho (talk) 04:45, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- If the work is free in the US but not the source country (I don't know if that applies here) then we can keep it locally as {{PD-USonly}}. Thryduulf (talk) 11:42, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- It would apply here except I finally found as good of an answer as we're likely to get. That it's governmental is probably irrelevant as it's a map and those rarely meet the Threshold of Originality, which means these are our answer: ToO in Greece and ToO of maps. So keep is my final answer. ~ Argenti Aertheri(Chat?) 04:46, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- If the work is free in the US but not the source country (I don't know if that applies here) then we can keep it locally as {{PD-USonly}}. Thryduulf (talk) 11:42, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Hmm... Dunno whether the court decision in a US case applies to non-US maps also. (By the way, an appellate court decision can be overturned by the Supreme Court. *ugh*) Commons insists that a work be free in both the source country and the US. Haven't seen yet a Greek court case about maps. George Ho (talk) 04:45, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Well I feel a bit silly: it's a map which means {{PD-map}} is the right license. ~ Argenti Aertheri(Chat?) 03:52, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- IMO it depends whether what Google is translating as "texts" is being used to mean "works" or specifically "textual works", both seem equally plausible - especially as Google offers an alternative translation as "official documents". Commons:Category:PD Greece contains lots of images, including maps, but that's not a guarantee the tag is being used correctly. Looking through the Commons deletion requests that link to the tag, all there were deleted were for reasons that don't help us here (e.g. not actually (or not certainly) works of the Greek government). Indeed the only deletion request there that I've found that appears relevant is Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hellenic Coast Guard flag Rethymno.jpg, which was kept, but a photograph of a flag and a map are different enough that the precedent might or might not be relevant. Thryduulf (talk) 02:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, now I'm not sure. Near as I can tell the copyright holder is the government, but unless someone who can read Greek comes along, dropping the relevant law here is all I've got: Η προστασία του παρόντος νόμου δεν εκτείνεται σε επίσημα κείμενα με τα οποία εκφράζεται η άσκηση πολιτειακής αρμοδιότητας και ιδίως σε νομοθετικά, διοικητικά ή δικαστικά κείμενα, καθώς και στις εκφράσεις της λαϊκής παράδοσης, στις ειδήσεις και στα απλά γεγονότα ή στοιχεία. Unless a Greek speaker comes along to say otherwise I'm going to have to agree with you. ~ Argenti Aertheri(Chat?) 01:51, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- The maps are more than just "simple facts and data". Maps require high intuition and skill, especially to perfect proximity and whatevs. As I see, the map looks very complex expressively, even if it's not artwork or... How do you call it? George Ho (talk) 22:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Explicit: To me it looks like it does apply here. "[T]here is no copyright protection for official texts [...] nor for expressions of folklore, news information or simple facts and data." Emphasis mine. ~ Argenti Aertheri(Chat?) 22:26, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Why? Thryduulf (talk) 19:12, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
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.
August 29
[edit]- File:Pascal Paoli Corsica Linea.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by ChemicalBear (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Not a logo as declared. Image can be replaced so fails NFCC1 --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 10:33, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
Recent nominations
[edit]August 30
[edit]- File:SojanJoseph.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Parabelleum (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
I could not find the said license at the source https://www.ashfordlabour.org.uk/ and thus cannot be moved to Commons. The subject is alive and thus not suitable for non-free criteria — DaxServer (t·m·e·c) 19:23, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 06:33, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
August 31
[edit]This is an alternate version of File:Shakira - Shakira (2014).png for the expanded edition of Shakira's 2014 self-titled album. The differences are very minor. 81.79.96.215 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 09:44, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:NFCC#3. One version of this image is enough. This doesn't differ significantly from the standard cover, and the text in Shakira (album) § Release and promotion explaining that the guitar is red can be easily understood without illustration. hinnk (talk) 08:22, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- File:HankWorkman.webp (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Coingeek (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Challenged F7. This is a textbook WP:NFCC#2 violation. The image is not a Forbes image as claimed. The image is from Getty as can be seen [2] here. If the uploader had bothered to actually include a URL to the Forbes article, it would likely be this article which credits the photo to Getty. Whpq (talk) 23:38, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per item #7 of WP:NFC#UUI. These types of images are almost always speedily deleted per F7, and I'm not seeing any reason why this shouldn't have been the case this time. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:31, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
September 1
[edit]- File:Bigfin squid May 2001.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Mgiganteus1 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Species is not extinct, and could be observed in the future. This makes the image replaceable and an NFI violation. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 19:28, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. It is the deepest-occurring squid genus, and the adults are known only from video, and this particular image is from the first scientific observation.
- Cremastra (talk) 18:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- That unfortunately doesn’t make it not an NFI violation. The species could be observed in the future, making the image itself in violation of the NFCC. I can’t make an NFI from an alive person, because the person could have a photo taken of them later. When they’re dead, then I can. Since this species is still alive (as of 16 hours ago, when the latest observation was published), then a NFI can’t be used. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 00:34, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:45, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Even aside from the above, we have multiple free images already in use in the article. Josh Milburn (talk) 08:29, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
September 2
[edit]- File:Unicefuk logo.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Lindsey Hills (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Redundant to File:Logo of UNICEF.svg and unused. Jonteemil (talk) 19:54, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, redundant to SVG file. Salavat (talk) 00:23, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete no reason to have an unused inferior copy of the SVG file. cyberdog958Talk 03:57, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- File:2012 Packers Seahawks Final Play.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Aqwfyj (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Fails WP:NFCCP #8, which states that an image's presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.
The screenshot in question is just a snapshot of a controversial play, one that cannot be grasped by one still image. The crux of the play was who had possession of the ball and when did they have possession. This still image, at best, provides a difficult agglomeration of players, hands and a barely noticeable football. It does not provide clarity on the topic of the article and its omission would not be a detriment to the article. An example of an American football image that would be encyclopedic would be a player with both feet in bounds when the call was that he was out-of-bounds, or something similar that is clarified by a snapshot in time. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:10, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- 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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons. Please nominate it for deletion there if you still feel it should be deleted. AnomieBOT⚡ 11:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC) Does not comply with WP:IUP
- 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.
September 3
[edit]- File:BendixG15.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Bubba73 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
We can delete this fair use image and replace it with File:BendixG15-2015.JPG which is even already in the article. The Quirky Kitty (talk) 10:08, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- File:USL Logo.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by 718 Bot (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
I think this logo is below c:COM:TOO US so I relicensed it to {{PD-textlogo}} but it was reverted by Stevencocoboy. Leave it up for discussion. Jonteemil (talk) 12:31, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- File:Street Fighter Zero – Capcom.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Cmbtrans (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
The file is a poster of Street Fighter Zero which incorporates memes from The Bus Uncle, in which in the article's section on effects on popular culture, there have been abundant text description on how the popular culture appropriated the video's content. The file only serves as a specific additional illustration, which can also be incorporated in the section's text description without affecting the reader's understanding. The file therefore violates WP:NFCC#1 and WP:NFCC#8, and should be therefore deleted. 廣九直通車 (talk) 13:34, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- 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 as G7 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:15, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- File:Terrell Owens - "The Catch II".png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Charlesaaronthompson (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Fails WP:NFCCP #8, which states that an image's presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.
The screenshot in question is a blurry TV screen grab that provides no encyclopedic value, as Terrell Owens can't even be distinguished, let alone with the football. The act of catching the football can't be conveyed in a still image. This is merely an attempt to fluff up an article with a pretty image that flatly fails Wikipedia's fair use policies. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:11, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Fuzzy image adds confusion, not any "understanding". —Bagumba (talk) 16:39, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, but only with the request that the team logos for each team not be re-inserted back into the infobox of The Catch II. Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 01:45, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- 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:DezCaughtIt.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by MushroomMan674 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Fails WP:NFCCP #8, which states that an image's presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.
This screenshot only captures a moment in time on what necessarily needs to be a video to understand what happened. There is some nuance here, so I encourage a quick read of the article. The controversy of this play came not from whether the ball hit the ground or moved (everyone conceded it did) but whether Bryant completed the process of the catch before lunging for the end zone. This cannot be encyclopedically represented with a fair use image. The omission of this image would not be detrimental to the article, as the explanation is needed for a grasp of what occurred (noting that a video would be the only way to adequately convey this). « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:15, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete He's just lying on the field. It doesn't add any "underatanding" of whether he actually caught the ball beforehand. Misuse of boilerplate text just to add any ol' picture to the page.—Bagumba (talk) 16:45, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, but with the request that the specific team logo wordmarks for each team not be re-inserted back into the infobox of the main article. Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 01:47, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
September 4
[edit]- File:Winstanley College Student Union Logo.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jguiii (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Seems to fail NFCC8, not the primary subject of the article and doesn't really increase a reader's knowledge of the subject. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 03:11, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- File:Winstanley College TV Logo.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jguiii (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Seems to fail NFCC8, not the primary subject of the article and doesn't really increase a reader's knowledge of the subject. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 03:12, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Is it even copyrightable? It seems too simple for copyright to apply, and its use in the article is an editorial decision which should be handled on the article talk page. 4.37.252.50 (talk) 18:23, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- I agree that it might be {{PD-textlogo}}, but in general, uses in articles are governed by the non-free content criteria, and FfD is the right place to discuss whether the NFCC are being met. jlwoodwa (talk) 18:42, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- The NFCC only apply to non-free content; they don't apply to public domain logos. Whether this is too simple to be eligible for copyright protection and should be converted to "PD-logo" or some other PD license is something that can be discussed here. If that's the case, then IP 4.37.252.50 is also right in that deciding whether to use a PD logo often can be resolved through article talk page discussion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:26, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- I agree that it might be {{PD-textlogo}}, but in general, uses in articles are governed by the non-free content criteria, and FfD is the right place to discuss whether the NFCC are being met. jlwoodwa (talk) 18:42, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Convert to PD-ineligible-USonly (
{{PD-ineligible-USonly|United Kingdom}}
): This basically seems to be nothing more than the letter "w" twice superimposed on a light blue background, which in my opinion seems to lack sufficient creativity to be eligible for copyright protection per c:COM:TOO US, even if it would still be considered eligible for such protection in the UK per c:COM:TOO UK. For logos like this, {{PD-ineligible-USonly}} is often used for local use on Wikipedia because (unlike Commons) Wikipedia only needs to comply with US copyright law. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:26, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- File:NoahFrankie Ponyo.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Prosperosity (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
This cover art is redundant to the Japanese cover currently in the infobox of the Gake no Ue no Ponyo (song) article. Use of more than one non-free file serving the same purpose violates criterion 3a of the non-free content policy. Delete. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:40, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- File:Mina-lupo sigla.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jaan (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
The screenshot of two portrayers may not contextually signify the song "parole parole". George Ho (talk) 07:38, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- File:Look of Love.JPG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jaan (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Film screenshot of two performers in a song segment may not contextually signify the song The Look of Love (1967 song). George Ho (talk) 07:41, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- File:Patty and Selma in their real hair color.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Faunas (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
I do not think this adds any meaningful commentary to the characters. Especially since this seems like a one off joke. (Oinkers42) (talk) 18:06, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - Fails WP:NFCC#8. The image is not the subject of significant sourced commentary and its removal from the article would not detract from a reader's understanding of the topic. -- Whpq (talk) 20:18, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- File:Ahmed Muthasim Adnan portrait.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by MAL MALDIVE (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Although the source Flickr account for this provides a free license, the information text states this is Uz. Chief Justice Ahmed Muthasim Adnan portrait by Supreme Court of Maldives.
so the Flickr account is not the rights holder for the image. c:Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Maldives indicates that government text of a legal nature is not copyrighted bur this isn't text. The image license is doubtful. Note that Commons has c:Category:Ahmed Muthasim Adnan so we are not without free images of the subject. Whpq (talk) 19:52, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete unless it can otherwise be shown (i.e. VRT verifiction) that the Flickr account holder is actually the copyright holder of the photo. Although it might've been unintentional, this does seem like a case of Flickrwashing and the Flickr licensing seems questionable at best. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:14, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- File:Joanna Harbour VVG.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by PortlandSaint (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Fails WP:NFCC#1 as candidate is alive and currently running for office. reppoptalk 22:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
September 5
[edit]- File:Chef Gilles Epie, Un Frenchy en cuisine TV show.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Epie2020 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
This photograph fails WP:NFCC#1 (no free equivalent) and WP:NFCC#8 (contextual significance), as the current role of the image is redundant compared to the accompanying text and does not significantly increase readers' understanding. However, as the uploader claims to be a friend of the photographer, I would suggest that the uploader contact the photographer and ask him about releasing this photo under a free license via c:COM:VRT. JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 04:14, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Footer
[edit]Today is September 5 2024. Put new nominations in Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2024 September 5 – (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 "===September 5===" 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.