Wikipedia:Files for discussion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
XFD backlog
V Nov Dec Jan Feb Total
CfD 0 1 11 0 12
TfD 0 0 3 0 3
MfD 0 0 0 0 0
FfD 0 0 6 0 6
RfD 0 0 44 0 44
AfD 0 0 33 0 33

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.

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  • Obsolete – The file has been replaced by a better version.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 tagged with a freeness claim, but may actually be eligible for copyright in the United States or the country of origin.
  • NFCC violation – The file is used under a claim of fair use but does not meet the requirements.
  • NFCC applied to free image – The file is used under a claim of fair use, but the file is either too simple, or is an image which has been wrongly labeled given evidence presented on the file description page.
  • Wrong license or status – The file is under one license, but the information on the file description pages suggests that a different license is more appropriate, or a clarification of status is desirable.
  • Wrongly claimed as own – The file is under a self license, but the information on the file description pages suggests otherwise.

If you have questions if something should be deleted, consider asking at Media Copyright Questions.

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=2023 February 6}} 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=2023 February 6}} 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=2023 February 6}} 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 1930, not 1924.
  • 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}}.


Some common reasons for deletion or removal from pages are:

  • Obsolete – The file has been replaced by a better version. Indicate the new file name.
  • Orphan – The file is not used on any pages in Wikipedia. (If the file is only available under "fair use", please use {{subst:orfud}} instead). Please consider moving "good" free licensed files to Commons rather than outright deleting them, other projects may find a use for them even if we have none; you can also apply {{Copy to Wikimedia Commons}}.
  • Unencyclopedic – The file doesn't seem likely to be useful in this encyclopedia (or for any Wikimedia project). Images used on userpages should generally not be nominated on this basis alone unless the user is violating the Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not policy by using Wikipedia to host excessive amounts unencyclopedic material (most commonly private photos).
  • Low quality – The image 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 file – The file marked as free may actually be non-free. If the file is determined to be non-free, then it will be subject to the non-free content criteria in order to remain on Wikipedia.
  • Non-free file issues – The non-free file may not meet all requirements outlined in the non-free file use policy, or may not be necessary to retain on Wikipedia or specific articles due to either free alternatives or better non-free alternative(s) existing.
  • File marked as non-free may actually be free – The file is marked non-free, but may actually be free content. (Example: A logo may not eligible for copyright alone because it is not original enough, and thus the logo is considered to be in the public domain.)

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.

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:

January 29

File:LoveAndRockets31.jpg

[edit]

File:LoveAndRockets31.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Knulclunk (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

The article already has one piece of non-free media and this isn't adding enough critical commentary or educational value to justify another piece. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 11:02, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

KEEP- The comic Love and Rockets (comic) was co-created by Gilbert and Jamie Hernandez. As each artist alternated cover duties, failing to show Jamie's work, style and two most central characters of the comic would be an oversight. This choice of using this later issue shows the evolved characters during the books heyday, the evolved logo and the influential style that would inspire later artists. The image is low resolution and meet all other criteria for WP:FUR, (small portion of work, irreplaceable, etc). Knulclunk (talk) 11:30, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Dua Lipa - Club Future Nostalgia screenshot.png

[edit]

File:Dua Lipa - Club Future Nostalgia screenshot.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by LOVI33 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Per WP:NFCC, non-free images should only be used if they add substantially to a reader's understanding of the topic. The picture depicts the artist staring at a vinyl against the night sky, this is mundane and its omission is not detrimental to the topic. The image is a screenshot of a visualiser, and as demonstrated it could be described in words therefore it is replaceable. >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 19:49, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:SBS On Demand logo.svg

[edit]

File:SBS On Demand logo.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Benstown (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This file is orphaned, and additionally the file hasn’t been used since 2016 as a logo for SBS On Demand, so this file should be deleted. From Bassie f (his talk page) 20:05, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tagged with speedy deletion criteria CSD F5 just now. From Bassie f (his talk page) 20:14, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Comment: I don't believe this logo qualifies for F5 as it is certainly below the threshold of originality in the United States. F5 only applies to non-free files. Ixfd64 (talk) 21:01, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Because of your reasons @Ixfd64, I will remove the F5 tag soon From Bassie f (his talk page) 21:23, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Removed the F5 tag 2mins ago. From Bassie f (his talk page) 21:27, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Sosa06.jpg

[edit]

File:Sosa06.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Laina barakat (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Affected:

File:Sosa02.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Laina barakat (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Screen grab from a film [1] with no evidence the uploader is the copyright holder. Image is not used anywhere. Ixfd64 (talk) 20:37, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Delete both, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 14:47, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:The Sensation of Sight poster.jpg

[edit]

File:The Sensation of Sight poster.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Laina barakat (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Unused film poster, no evidence the uploader is the copyright holder. Ixfd64 (talk) 20:40, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

January 27

File:Marie-Louise Meilleur, 1998.jpg

[edit]

File:Marie-Louise Meilleur, 1998.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Holiday56 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

We don't require a non-free image of her, when multiple free images of her in earlier life exist. Fails WP:NFCC#1 as there are other free photos of her, and WP:NFCC#8 as the image doesn't significantly enhance the reader's understanding of the article. Interstellarity (talk) 23:55, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Weak keep unlike the images of supercentenarians I have nominated in threads above, there doesn't look to be a freely licenced image of her. If a definitely free image can be found, then delete as failing WP:NFCC#1, but unless that is shown, this appears to be a valid fair use. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:01, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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.

January 30[edit]

File:Southern Steel logo.jpg[edit]

File:Southern Steel logo.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Liveste (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Old logo, which isn't needed as new logo is better, so fails WP:NFCC#1. Also fails WP:NFCC#8, as contrary to the fair use summary, it is not the primary means of visual identification at the top of the article dedicated to the entity in question. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:04, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:NBC Magic.gif[edit]

File:NBC Magic.gif (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Liveste (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Old logo, which isn't needed as new logo is better, so fails WP:NFCC#1. Also fails WP:NFCC#8, as contrary to the fair use summary, it is not the primary means of visual identification at the top of the article dedicated to the entity in question. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:04, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Tapuy.jpeg[edit]

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

Unused derivative work of copyrighted packaging. The small size and lack of metadata suggest the photo is not the uploader's own work either. Ixfd64 (talk) 19:52, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Cover of journal "Mathematics of Computation".gif[edit]

File:Cover of journal "Mathematics of Computation".gif (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Exceptg (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Very low quality and resolution. Replaced with a PD version at File:Mcom-92-340-print-matter-1.png on Commons and no longer used. Ixfd64 (talk) 21:58, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Recent nominations[edit]

January 31[edit]

File:Mykhailo Korenovsky family kitchen.webp[edit]

File:Mykhailo Korenovsky family kitchen.webp (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by CT55555 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

I don't think there is a good reason to keep this one, as there is a free replacement available (File:Dnipro_after_Russian_missile_attack,_2023-01-14_(42-15).jpg). This could only be kept if an article about the kitchen photo is to be created. Bedivere (talk) 03:29, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Keep. I think you've misunderstood what the photo represents. It is not just another visual of 2022–2023 Dnipro missile strikes. It's the specific photo that went viral and made global news. Check out Yan Dobronosov for more context. CT55555(talk) 03:34, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Let me elaborate my point. The article of the photographer could use the alternative, free picture instead of his own, copyrighted one while saying "The kitchen of the boxing coach, subject of Dobronosov's picture". As for the boxer's article, it is not even needed in my opinion if the point is illustrating the kitchen of the house where he lived and died. This copyrighted photo could be kept only if there is an article for the picture itself, otherwise these fair use rationales are unconvincing, to me at least. Bedivere (talk) 03:37, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think the free use rationale that I used is for this exact situation.
For transparency, I mentioned this trilogy of delete proposals in the hope of trying to find an elegant solution at Article Rescue Squadron. CT55555(talk) 04:30, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The picture can be easily replaced by a free alternative (except in the context of an eventual article about the photograph itself, where fair use rationale would be legitimate as no replacement for the actual photo can be generated). Bedivere (talk) 20:22, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Korematsu google doodle.jpg[edit]

File:Korematsu google doodle.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Locoscoutla (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

The file is a Google Doodle graphic that was used on the article of Fred Korematsu Day. However, as the holiday is increasingly celebrated throughout the United States (see the section on Additional States), free images can be expected to be available from celebrations. This is particularly true in California (which the California government is one of the earliest and biggest promoter of the day), where government works are exempt from copyright. Moreover, the text stated in "Other Commemorations" is also self-explanatory by describing the composition and symbolism of the graphic, and it seems that they were quite sufficient. As a result the file is likely to violate WP:NFCC#1, and should be deleted. 廣九直通車 (talk) 05:03, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Journal of Topology cover.gif[edit]

File:Journal of Topology cover.gif (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by DePiep (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Low quality and resolution version of PD journal cover. Replaced with File:Journal of Topology cover.jpg on Commons and no longer used. Ixfd64 (talk) 18:49, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deletion appropriate. (2012 Uploader here). DePiep (talk) 18:52, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences.tif[edit]

File:Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences.tif (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Luke.j.ruby (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Replaced with a higher quality cover at File:Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences.png on Commons and no longer used. Ixfd64 (talk) 19:56, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

February 1[edit]

File:YingYe3Jia1OST.jpg[edit]

File:YingYe3Jia1OST.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by 001Jrm (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Non-free album cover being used in a WP:DECORATIVE manner in Ying Ye 3 Jia 1#Soundtrack. Non-free album cover art is generally allowed to be used for primary identification purposes in stand-alone articles about albums, but its use in other articles is generally only allowed when the cover art itself is the subject of sourced critical commentary as explained in WP:NFC#cite_note-3 and the context for non-free use required by WP:NFCC#8 is evident. There is no such commentary for this particular album cover anywhere in the article, and the use of soundtrack album cover art in articles about films or TV programs is generally not allowed for this reason as explained in WP:FILMSCORE and MOS:TVPRODUCTION. If the soundtrack album is Wikipedia notable per WP:NALBUM and a stand-alone article about it can be created, this image would be fine to use in said article; otherwise, I don't see how this file can be kept based on the way its currently being used. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:45, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Chewy Pet Food Logo.png[edit]

File:Chewy Pet Food Logo.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by CNMall41 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Appears to be PD-textlogo, not copyrighted/fair use The Quirky Kitty (talk) 05:32, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Convert license to {{PD-logo}}, replace non-free use rationale with {{Information}}, and then tag with {{Trademark}} and {{Copy to Wikimedia Commons}} per c:COM:TOO United States. For future refrence The Quirky Kitty, if you come across something as obvious as this, you probably don't need to start a discussion about it here at FFD. You can either be WP:BOLD and change the license and other stuff yourself, or (2) you can ask about it at WP:MCQ. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:22, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Ahhh! I thought changing a file's license was generally a no-no. I see now, it's permissible without a discussion in very simple cases. The Quirky Kitty (talk) 06:25, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    If someone reverts the changes you made and you're unable to convince them the licensing should be changed, then that would probably be the time to start a discussion about it at FFD. Copyright licenses like anything else on Wikipedia are added by users and often it's just assumed that any type of company logo needs to be uploaded as non-free content. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:27, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment: A vector version is available at File:Chewy pet food logo.svg on Commons. Ixfd64 (talk) 18:28, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:NDS Philippine 200 Peso Banknote Obverse.jpg[edit]

File:NDS Philippine 200 Peso Banknote Obverse.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Vj7895 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Clearly not a self-made file, redundant to File:NDS obverse 200 Philippine peso bill.jpg CMD (talk) 05:54, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Rodger Jacobs.jpg[edit]

File:Rodger Jacobs.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Eric Carpenter (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Nothing exceptionally different from File:Rodger Jacobs 2010.jpg. One fair use file is sufficient. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 12:10, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:UptonAvenueMarket.png[edit]

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

Horrendous quality, replaceable with File:Upton_station_-_April_2019.jpg. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 12:14, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Delete, orphaned with no obvious value due to quality. Salavat (talk) 14:56, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:RobertCHeartbreak.jpg[edit]

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

Non-free file issue - Listing this for discussion to get clarity on the use of images from museum websites. This image was taken directly from the Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden's collection search, sized down and uploaded as fair use. As far as I know, even non-free images of art uploaded as fair use need to have author information, correct? As the museum never released information about who made this photograph, there is no author for us to attribute the reproduction to (even though technically there is no real legal "authorship" here for the reproduction as it's a mechanical reproduction of 2D copyrighted art). Should images like this be kept? 19h00s (talk) 15:24, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete I don't think the lack of photographer would be an issue for the reason you mention, but I would argue that since there is no commentary at all on the image, it is very questionable whether it passes the non-free content criteria 3a and 8 with so many other samples of his style already in the article. Felix QW (talk) 22:45, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Health Education Journal front cover image.gif[edit]

File:Health Education Journal front cover image.gif (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Luke.j.ruby (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Very small and blurry for a PD cover. Replaced with higher-quality and more recent version at File:Health Education Journal cover.png on Commons, and no longer used. Ixfd64 (talk) 18:39, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Parisexpoizmir.jpg[edit]

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

France has no freedom of panorama at all. Image is not used anywhere. Ixfd64 (talk) 19:09, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Paula17.jpg[edit]

File:Paula17.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Punlapa (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Small size, lack of metadata and presence of watermark suggest this photo is not freely licensed. Currently not used anywhere. Ixfd64 (talk) 19:11, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

February 2[edit]

File:Snes9x screenshot july 2014.png[edit]

File:Snes9x screenshot july 2014.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by PremiumBananas (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

I think the UI may be too simple to be copyrightable. However, I'm putting it up for discussion here because we don't have many ToO examples for software user interfaces. Ixfd64 (talk) 00:57, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Whpq (talk) 04:11, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relicense as below the ToO, since I don't see it meeting the threshold for design and it has insufficient novelty in its text to qualify on grounds of textual composition. Felix QW (talk) 22:37, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:1 2 2020 statement AFP.jpg[edit]

File:1 2 2020 statement AFP.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Kalle Divins (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Doubtful own work as this seems to be an official statement from the party. Contains fair use elements as well. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 12:06, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:2 2 2020 statement AFP.jpg[edit]

File:2 2 2020 statement AFP.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Kalle Divins (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Unused text-only file and certainly not an own work. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 12:08, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Map of Belorado, Burgos.jpg[edit]

File:Map of Belorado, Burgos.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Raymond Cruise (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Unused, superseded by File:Mapa_municipal_Belorado.png. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 12:25, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:2018 cover Moreana.gif[edit]

File:2018 cover Moreana.gif (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Randykitty (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Replaced with a higher-resolution version at File:Moreana journal cover.png and no longer used. Unsuitable for Commons as it is likely copyrighted in its country of origin. Ixfd64 (talk) 19:32, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:201 Squadron RAF.jpg[edit]

File:201 Squadron RAF.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by H1523702 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Crown copyright has long expired. Replaced with larger image at File:No. 201 Squadron RAF badge.png on Commons, and no longer used. Ixfd64 (talk) 20:09, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:1 Squadron RAF.jpg[edit]

File:1 Squadron RAF.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by H1523702 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Crown copyright expired in 1987. Replaced with File:No. 1 Squadron RAF badge.png on Commons and no longer used. Ixfd64 (talk) 23:20, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Remote Play.JPG[edit]

File:Remote Play.JPG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Steveketchup (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Screen contents are likely copyrighted and non-free. Photo is not used anywhere. Ixfd64 (talk) 23:26, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:2 Squadron RAF.jpg[edit]

File:2 Squadron RAF.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by H1523702 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Crown copyright expired in 1987. Replaced with File:No. 2 Squadron RAF badge.png on Commons and no longer used. Ixfd64 (talk) 23:35, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

February 3[edit]

File:4 Squadron RAF.jpg[edit]

File:4 Squadron RAF.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by H1523702 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Crown copyright expired in 1987. Replaced with File:No. 4 Squadron RAF badge.png on Commons and no longer used. Ixfd64 (talk) 19:58, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

February 4[edit]

File:Britishpassport UK4.png[edit]

File:Britishpassport UK4.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Gustave.iii (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

A free equivalent file File:British Passport 2020.svg exists which can be substituted. Jackycheung0929 (talk) 17:18, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It seems to me as if any copyright claim for the intended substitute would also apply to the image under discussion, though. The argument is that the design of the passport has not sufficiently changed since before 1973 (cf. File:Claudia Jones passport 00.jpg) and therefore Crown copyright on it has expired, an expiry we deem to be valid worldwide. Felix QW (talk) 22:34, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:UFO over Billings Montana 2-1-2023.png[edit]

File:UFO over Billings Montana 2-1-2023.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by DinoSoupCanada (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

I found an alternative photo that has been released into public domain by the author. Ixfd64 (talk) 19:46, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This photo isn't as good. 🍁🏳️‍🌈 DinoSoupCanada 🏳️‍🌈 🍁 (talk) 19:48, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A photo having a lower quality does not exclude it from being the new image if it is a freely-licensed image. They both illustrate the balloon. SWinxy (talk) 20:59, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
By that argument, so does a single white pixel. Keavon (talk) 04:58, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Both pictures are poor quality but the public domain picture is dreadful, just a fuzzy white spot. The one being discussed for deletion is okay under the fair use rationale but one of better quality released into the public domain would be more desirable. If the US Air Force publish a picture in due course that they took before destroying the balloon it would be in the public domain under US Government rules. O'Dea (talk) 21:03, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support deletion and replacement. WP:NFCCP requires us to use a free image instead of a non-free one when the free one serves the same encyclopedic purpose. The quality of both images seems comparable (we should zoom and crop the new one), but this is mostly immaterial. The best free picture would be one released by the Air Force, if it ever comes out. — Goszei (talk) 21:26, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I guess it's fine. But we should replace it when better images come out into public domain. 🍁🏳️‍🌈 DinoSoupCanada 🏳️‍🌈 🍁 (talk) 21:35, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I support the deletion and replacement as well (speedy, in fact). Free use image can (and has) been made. Fails NFCC#1. DecafPotato (talk) 21:50, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Comment: Given the highly publicized nature of this case, I'd be very surprised if the U.S. government doesn't release some photos soon. Ixfd64 (talk) 21:53, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Keep this photo up, until a better, more visable one is acquired. Need a photo of the ballon, for context. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.126.58.54 (talk) 22:21, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete as not a valid fair-use rationale, but, we're not sing the one of the tiny dot either. It is unrecognizable and pointless. Zaathras (talk) 04:43, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Delete and Alternative: as there is a free photo available. However, instead of the photo put forward by Ixfd64, I propose that this one be used, posted in the same (album/post/collage?) by the same author and also in the public domain; the picture has a higher resolution, the subject (the balloon) is more sharply defined, and the contrast is not digitally altered, revealing a faintly visible technology bay—all in all higher quality (if zoomed in and cropped). I agree with Goszei that a government-published photo would be the best free alternative out there. K.H.Q. (talk) 05:40, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep, as long as it doesn't violate copyright, this is far and away (no pun intended) the best and clearest image I think that is available on the balloon. Moops T 06:22, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep: It's unfortunately the best of the worst at the minute, until we either find a clearer image we can use under fair use rationale or someone uploads another, clearer image in the public domain. Neither proposed free-use image in this discussion is an improvement, unfortunately.—Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 11:47, 5 February 2023 (UTC) Update: we got a better one, so we can bin this image now.—Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 20:20, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep: The zoomed out image doesn't show the balloon properly, while the supposedly low quality one does. Delete the image as a better quality one has been found under CC license —DarkSpartan (talk) 12:56, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep - the alternate proposals show much more sky than they do the balloon. The balloon can barely be distinguished without zooming in. Delete following new image below. XtraJovial (talkcontribs) 16:42, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep - at thumbnail size, the PD image is absolutely useless. ɱ (talk) 17:01, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Update: @DinoSoupCanada, Moops, Ineffablebookkeeper, DarkSpartan, XtraJovial, and : Good news. Chase Doak — who one of the very best photographs of the balloon — has kindly released it under a Creative Commons license. Because it was submitted to Commons after appearing elsewhere, I contacted the author on Instagram and got confirmation that he was indeed the person who uploaded it to Commons. Ixfd64 (talk) 19:43, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Awesome, thanks! XtraJovial (talkcontribs) 19:46, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Great! 🍁🏳️‍🌈 DinoSoupCanada 🏳️‍🌈 🍁 (talk) 20:40, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete - per @Ixfd64. Adding image to article Crusader1096 (message) 20:03, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Jim Chamberlin.jpg[edit]

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

While the description claims it to be by a "government photographer", the original source lists it as a courtesy image from the estate of the subject. This makes it difficult to determine whether America or Canada is the source country. Unsuitable for fair use as there already is a NASA image of the subject on the page that could be used instead. Felix QW (talk) 22:27, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

February 5[edit]

File:Woodstock poster.jpg[edit]

File:Woodstock poster.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Dandin1 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Is there any reason why this is not PD-US-no notice? If we determine that it's OK, then we can upload this high-res version to Commons. King of ♥ 03:27, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Village.gif[edit]

File:Village.gif (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Mrdrewblue (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Unused floor plan, no permission as well. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 09:24, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:John M. Burns (2005).jpg[edit]

File:John M. Burns (2005).jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Vizjim (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Flagged presumably as a derivative work of the magazine cover 10 years ago by (a legal sock of) ShakespeareFan00, I am putting this out there since it may qualify for de minimis; besides, cropping or blurring the cover would also allay the DW concerns. Felix QW (talk) 11:39, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • I was one of the editors of the (noncommercial) fanzine at the time. It no longer exists. I also have the contact details for the cover artist. Not familiar with WP procedures on this - how could I prove any of this? Vizjim (talk) 17:01, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:John-Vedrenne.jpg[edit]

File:John-Vedrenne.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jack1956 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Orphaned image of whose provenance we know nothing. There is a higher quality image in current use in the article on the subject, of which we can at least be completely sure that it is PD in the US. Felix QW (talk) 12:12, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:John-William-Brodie-Innes.jpg[edit]

File:John-William-Brodie-Innes.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jack1956 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Not a formal studio portrait, and no trace of the publication history. Could well be copyrighted in the US until up to 2043, but may qualify as fair use unless an undoubtably free image emerges. Felix QW (talk) 12:19, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Undoubtedly fair use as the subject died in 1923 and no other image freely available. I believe the image dates to 1890-1911. Jack1956 (talk) 13:38, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Thrills.jpg[edit]

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

Derivative work. Permission needed. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:45, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete Unused, and low quality too. Felix QW (talk) 16:47, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Pime logo 2.jpg[edit]

File:Pime logo 2.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Rickschulte (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Certainly not an own work, but a work of Pontifical Institute for Foreign Missions and seems to be a little too complicated to be kept as a CC file. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:46, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:NXT Black and Gold.png[edit]

File:NXT Black and Gold.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Vjmlhds (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Unused and low-quality logo likely above the threshold of originality. Ixfd64 (talk) 17:28, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

February 6[edit]

Footer[edit]

Today is February 6 2023. Put new nominations in Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2023 February 6 – (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 "===February 6===" 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.