Wikipedia:Files for discussion

Skip to table of contents · Skip to current discussions · Purge this page

WP:FFD

XFD backlog
V	Sep	Oct	Total
CfD	0	0	0
TfD	0	4	4
MfD	5	1	6
FfD	0	2	2
RfD	0	36	36
AfD	0	3	3

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

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.
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.
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.
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.)
For blatant copyright infringements, use speedy deletion by tagging the file {{db-f9}}.
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}}.
Files that are hosted on Wikimedia Commons cannot be deleted via this process. Please use the Commons deletion page instead.
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.
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.
If you are the uploader of the image, tag it with {{db-author}}.

Instructions for listing files for discussion

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

1	Edit the file page. Add `{{Ffd\|log=2024 October 16}}` to the file page.
2	Create its FfD subsection. Follow this edit link and list the file using `{{subst:Ffd2\|File_name.ext\|uploader=\|reason=}}` `~~~~` Leave the subject heading blank. If the file has been replaced by another file, name the file that replaced it in your reason for deletion. Refer below for a list of other common reasons. For listing additional files with the same reason, edit the first file section and use `{{subst:Ffd2a\|File_name.ext\|Uploader=}}` for each additional file. You may use this tool to quickly generate Ffd2a listings. Also, add `{{Ffd\|log=2024 October 16}}` to the top of the file page of each file other than the first one nominated.
3	Give due notice. Inform the uploader by adding a message to their talk page using `{{subst:Ffd notice\|File_name.ext}}` Remember to replace "File_name.ext" with the name of the image or media For multiple images by the same user, use `{{subst:Ffd notice multi\|First_file.ext\|Second_file.ext\|Third_file.ext}}` `~~~~` (can handle up to 26) If the image is in use, also consider adding `{{FFDC\|File_name.ext\|log=2024 October 16}}` to the caption(s), or adding a notice to the article talk pages. Consider also notifying relevant WikiProjects of the discussion.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Instructions for discussion participation

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

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

Old discussions

Shortcut

WP:FFDO

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

October 6

File:2023 Lewiston shooting.jpg

[edit]

We may be able to relicense this to c:template:PD-automated if it could be established that there was no human input when this image was created. Ixfd64 (talk) 15:15, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:56, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Status quo, keep as-is. The assertion made by PD-automated has never been tested in US court. That said, I don't see anything wrong with the non-free usage of the image. -Fastily 00:11, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2

File:07-17-2016BatonRougeshooting.jpg

[edit]

The source is stated to be a CCTV camera. In this case, c:template:PD-automated could probably apply. Ixfd64 (talk) 17:11, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Status quo, keep as-is. The assertion made by PD-automated has never been tested in US court. That said, I don't see anything wrong with the non-free usage of the image. -Fastily 00:29, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For older nominations, see the archives.

Discussions approaching conclusion

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

October 9

File:Lexicon of the Modern Arabic Language.jpg

Poor quality. MSMST1543 (talk) 04:18, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Twitter 2010 logo - from Commons.svg

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 F8 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:05, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We typically don't keep non-free former logos unless there is significant commentary about them. The article only has a single sentence that mentions this particular logo, which is nowhere as popular as the 2012–2023 version that we all know and love. Ixfd64 (talk) 21:07, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This logo is important for the article (as the article mentions it). "Logos" section needs all of the former logos. AimanAbir18plus (talk) 17:54, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Twitter bird was released under the c:Template:Apache license, see c:Category:Twitter bird logos and File:Twitter 2010 logo.svg. ✗plicit 23:58, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nice find. I wasn't aware this older bird logo was freely licensed too. Ixfd64 (talk) 00:21, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is the bird being licenced under Apache enough for this logo to be free?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Techie3 (talk) 11:03, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Recent nominations

October 10

File:Tenta-as-Sumotori.gif

I originally tagged this as replaceable fair use, but it was contested by the uploader with the following rationale: "The subject, a notable professional wrestler who died in 2006, was a rikishi for 9 months in Japan (Nov '85 to Jul '86); this tag presumes that it was enough time to gestate some random person in Japan taking a photo of Makushita (third division) bout of a the sumo equivalent of a minor-league player. Respectfully, the assumption that there would be a free version of this available from that brief window (on film) seems to be a bit of a reach."

This is a textbook violation of WP:NFCC#1. Free alternatives of the subject exist (see c:Category:John Tenta). We do not need a non-free image of him in a sumo ring to understand that he was a briefly a sumo wrestler. ✗plicit 00:04, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The subject, a notable professional wrestler who competed from 1987-2004 and died in 2006, was a rikishi for 9 months in Japan (Nov '85 to Jul '86), almost entirely an unknown at that level. This tag for "no free equivalent" presumes 9-months in the 1980s was enough time to gestate some random person in Japan taking a photo of Makushita (third division) bout of a the sumo equivalent of a minor-league player. Respectfully, the assumption that there would be a free version of this available from that brief window (on film) seems to be a bit of a reach. In theory, could there be such a photo? Yes. Is it ever likely to surface? Unlikely. I'm not sure if this tag was meant to foreclose all situations where the likelihood of finding a non-free equivalent is possible. Wikipedia has articles of rikishi, it's still an interesting aspect of his life. I get that some Wikipedians are deletionists and are passionate about removing things, but I respectfully ask for it to be kept. --Bobak (talk)

File:Frontier Corps Logos.png

The file shows the emblems of the 3 subunits of the Frontier Corps. As the article already used File:FC main logo.jpg as the main representation, the file is redundant and should be used in the separate articles (at Frontier Corps Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (North), Frontier Corps Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (South), Frontier Corps Balochistan (North) and Frontier Corps Balochistan (South)).

The file therefore violates WP:NFCC#3a, and should be deleted. 廣九直通車 (talk) 04:23, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dartmouth mermaid.jpg

No freedom of panorama for 3D artworks in the United States. This sculpture was erected in 2005 and is therefore too recent to be in public domain due to age. Photo is not used anywhere. Ixfd64 (talk) 20:26, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 11

File:Title Card for Chicken Shop Date (2014).jpeg

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 F9 by Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IMDb images are not automatically in public domain. Image is not used anywhere. Ixfd64 (talk) 00:48, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Alexandre Tarsaidze.jpg

per c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Alexandre Tarsaidze.jpg Magog the Ogre (t • c) 00:57, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, based on the Deletion request on Commons I've changed the licensing to Non-free biog-pic and added a fair use. Salavat (talk) 06:20, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Geraldine High School.png

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: Speedy Delete as a copyright violation.. Whpq (talk) 13:39, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged with {{PD-because}} with the reason "school logo." However, my understanding is school logos are not exempt from copyright in New Zealand. Only used in draft space. Ixfd64 (talk) 01:52, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as DB-9 they clearly do reserve their copyright rights: [1] Traumnovelle (talk) 08:05, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Pied piper poster.jpg

Tagged with {{PD-because}} with the reason "the film was made in 1933." However, corporate works are copyrighted for 95 years. This poster may be in public domain for other reasons, but this requires evidence. Ixfd64 (talk) 01:55, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think that poster would stay because Disney's pied piper short is old and is now in public domain and I have almost forgotten that I uploaded this poster into its Wikipedia page until now. So I think this poster would stay. Belrien12 (talk) 07:39, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Except as far as my research goes, The Pied Piper is still under copyright until 2029. The poster may be public domain though since I don't see a copyright notice on it (difficult to tell if IMDb has all of the poster though.) Abzeronow (talk) 02:57, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relicense as fair use. Abzeronow's explanation is correct. The film has a valid copyright notice on it, and it's likely under copyright until 2029, unless Disney neglected to renew the copyright (which is unlikely). This image may be public domain, but we'd need more information about the poster to evaluate its status. hinnk (talk) 12:17, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Group Portrait of the staff of the Auckland Public Library with John Barr in the centre C1930.jpg

Certainly not required to illustrate the article Epsom Library. The image might be public domain but I can't find the original record from Auckland Libraries to confirm that.

There is a free image of John Barr on Commons so fails NFCC#1 as well. File:1937_New_Zealand_Library_Association_Conference_in_Wellington.jpg Traumnovelle (talk) 08:01, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kingsley's Chicken Logo.jpg

Uploaded for Kingsley's Chicken. No other use. Can be restored if said article is moved to mainspace. --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 11:53, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Minorax. Thanks for bringing this here. Back in April, I requested the deleted article be restored/userfied by User:MBisanz who closed out the deletion discussion in 2016. I believe that there has now been broader coverage and the rational for deletion would not still apply. Unfortunately, this user is inactive so nothing has yet come of it. I will now pursue with an admin or other appropriate user in order to get an answer on this as soon as possible. I appreciate that it can be restored later if the article is moved, but if there is a prospect that the article may be restored, it would seem premature to do so, especially as it is tagged as public domain and therefore free use. Dfadden (talk) 21:01, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Loch 4.jpg

Low-quality image replaceable with numerous higher-quality images at c:Category:Jovibarba globifera. This one also has questionable licensing – it is attributed to "Manuel Werner, Nürtingen, Germany", but there is no evidence that this is the uploader.

In particular, the use at Hen and chicken plant can be replaced with File:Jovibarba globifera x 01.JPG. The use at Hen and chicks can be replaced with File:Hens and Chicks growing amid other succulents.jpg (which is already on the page in the gallery section). The use at Jovibarba can be replaced with File:Hen & Chicks (succulent plant).jpg. Best, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 16:11, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, maybe transfer to Commons. The uploader's name is Manuel and they are from Germany, at least according to their introduction. Seems reasonable to assume they were trying to upload it as {{Self}}. hinnk (talk) 12:26, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I missed that; thank you, hinnk! I do not think this is eligible for Commons because it is one of the final 3 images tagged as {{assumed license}} (which is what brought this file to my attention). c:COM:GOF might apply, though it was not uploaded to Commons before the cutoff date?
I still think we should delete this image because there are higher-resolution images – without questionable licensing – available to replace it. Best, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 20:23, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the pages that use c:Template:Assumed license, it seems like eligible images have been transferred over within the past few years (e.g. File:La Barca Condado.jpg) which makes me think we'd be good to do the same with this one.

I agree that there are probably better images that could be used. My suggestion to keep (at Commons) is mostly because the image still falls within scope and it'd preserve the file history for anyone who's reused it in the 20 years since it was uploaded. hinnk (talk) 04:13, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to move to Commons and make the replacements locally. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 17:32, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Missing license information, plain and simple. File was uploaded with no license and a bogus license was added by someone else. -Fastily 07:09, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:WRP 2001 Chisholm-Smoke.jpg

Tagged with {{PD-because}} with the reason "it is in the Alberta government public wildfire research website." However, works by the Canadian government are not automatically in public domain. The source website's copyright terms indicate what is equivalent to a CC BY-NC-ND license. Image is not used in article space. Ixfd64 (talk) 17:25, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, unless evidence of permission can be established. Salavat (talk) 08:19, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dragon Age Dreadwolf Logo 2022.jpeg

Fails WP:NFCC#1 and #8. This is the former logo displaying the title of a video game whose title was later changed to Dragon Age: The Veilguard. Because the image displays only the game's former title, its meaning can readily be conveyed by text, and the image does not aid the understanding of the topic. The logo, as such, is not discussed in the game's article. Sandstein 18:58, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It's not really helpful to explain anything that can't be said in the article body. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:39, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Raqqacivilcouncil.jpg

No standalone article. Usage does not increase reader's knowledge. Fails WP:NFCC8. --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 23:26, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tabqacivilcouncil.jpg

No standalone article. Usage does not increase reader's knowledge. Fails WP:NFCC8. --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 23:26, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Manbijcivilcouncil.jpg

No standalone article. Usage does not increase reader's knowledge. Fails WP:NFCC8. --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 23:26, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Deirezzorcivilcouncil.jpg

No standalone article. Usage does not increase reader's knowledge. Fails WP:NFCC8. --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 23:26, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sayyid ummar bafaqi.jpeg

Dubious claim of own work - appears to be AI generated from something like the original file at ml:File:Sayed Ummer Bafakhy.jpg — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:43, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: There was some recent discussion about this type of image at WT:IUP#AI-generated images of people and the rough (unofficial) consensus seems to be that they shouldn't be allowed not only because of potential copyright violations but also for encyclopedic reasons. If the other Malayalam Wikipedia file mentioned above by JJMC89 is really the same person and its provenance is sound, then perhaps it could be uploaded locally to Wikipedia as non-free (if still protected by copyright) or to Commons (if within the public domain or otherwise freely licensed). -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:37, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Km sahib.jpeg

Dubious claim of own work - previously tagged with {{permission pending}} as if it were someone else's work; appears to be AI generated — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:45, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 12

File:Utas Men 2023.jpeg

Source website does not indicate image is in public domain. Ixfd64 (talk) 03:42, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, unless evidence of permission can be established. Salavat (talk) 08:22, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pokken Tournament Chandelure.jpg

Image currently serves a purely decorative use in the article; it does not aid significantly with understanding the commentary it is attached to, and is overall not necessary for understanding the subject overall. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 03:58, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fleetwood Mac - Say You Love Me.ogg

De-PRODded per rationale about the sample's usefulness and necessity for readers to recognize the song. I still have reservations about the sample. Other media can play the whole song legitimately and legally and can do the same roles that the sample does. Secondly, from my (re-)reading of "contextual significance" criterion and NFC guideline's clarity of "contextual significance and the song article using the sample, the sample is supposed to clarify what the whole article says about the song.

Hearing the whole chorus over and over within the sample, I fail to see how the descriptions about and receptions toward the song fail to be contextually understood without the sample. Furthermore, I'm unconvinced that a small sample suffices to contextually signify the song. The whole article already suffices to make the whole song contextually significant, making this sample unnecessary. Even the song title and the band name already suffice also. George Ho (talk) 05:05, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sw15sept2001.jpg

The file is a scan of the Socialist Worker (published in the UK), in which File:Socialist Worker front page.jpg already exists to serve as the main depiction. Being redundant except for showing the newspaper's old format (which is just another illustration that can be omitted), the file fails WP:NFCC#3a, and should be therefore deleted. 廣九直通車 (talk) 10:49, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 13

File:UWGeorge Hopper.JPG

No freedom of panorama for 3D artworks in the United States. This sculpture was created in 1993 [2] and is therefore too recent to be in public domain due to age. Image is not used anywhere. Ixfd64 (talk) 23:24, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 00:23, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 14

File:8 Parche.jpg Baani Sandhu.jpg

Unused album cover, missing evidence the copyright holder has released it under a free license. Ixfd64 (talk) 00:13, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 00:23, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Screenshot from film Wild Dog Dingo.png

The screenshot is used in the Cast section of The Wild Dog Dingo. The image fails WP:NFCC#3a since the poster already illustrates the article and there is no critical commentary of the image itself, it does nothing to increase the reader's understanding of the film and its exclusion is not detrimental to the understanding of the film, thereby failing WP:NFCC#8. Aspects (talk) 22:39, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

keep the poster is useless to understanding of the film hence NFCC#3a is not violated. If you insist, I may happily delete the primitive poster. The discussed image is crucial to understand the teenage love drama hence NFCC#8 is OK. It says more than thousand words written by a wikipedian. We do not do critical commentaries on screentshots, so this criticism is irrelevant. "does nothing to increase" is a personal opinion. I think otherwise, that's why I added it. --Altenmann >talk 23:35, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 15

File:Legoland Reserve 'N' Ride Logo.png

Used in 4 articles but usage fails WP:NFCC8 as none of it is a primary topic and it's only used to indicate "Reserve 'N' Ride available" --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 06:16, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:NHL Logo former.svg

The old, former NHL (National Hockey League) logo is tagged with {{PD-US-expired-abroad}}, which disallows transfer to Commons. On the contrary, if the old logo debuted in 1946, this old logo's copyright wasn't renewed in 1973 or 1974. If it debuted in 1918, the logo might've or would've been all right to use in Commons. The logo itself uses plainly "NHL" not in the context of a literary work, such as Bambi, a Life in the Woods of the 1996 Twin Books court case. Furthermore, just plain (Latin) letters have been used (Cornell). Moreover, no evidence/proof that this logo is neither an American nor a Canadian work has been made. Should be transferred to Commons in either case. George Ho (talk) 18:28, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Past logos of NHL: link. George Ho (talk) 18:34, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 16

File:DavidFeldman.jpg

Unused, possibly out of scope or non-notable person. The main article was deleted per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David N. Feldman. 146.196.41.141 (talk) 07:23, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Today is October 16 2024. Put new nominations in Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2024 October 16 – (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 "===October 16===" 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.

v t e Wikipedia community
For a listing of current collaborations, tasks, and news, see the Community portal. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the Dashboard.
General community topics	Administration News The Signpost Goings-on In the media Meetups Mailing lists Wikipedians Statistics The Wikipedia Library Centralized discussion Village pump Idea lab Policy Proposals Technical Miscellaneous WMF Holidays Bots
Contents and grading	Requested articles Most-wanted articles Images needing articles Articles needing images Articles for creation WP:AFC/R WP:AFC/C Creation Help Vital articles Articles for improvement Peer review Good article nominations Featured article candidates Lists Pictures Topics Article translation Pages Main Page Errors
WikiProjects and collaborations	Directory Culture and the arts Geographical History and society Science, technology and engineering Wikipedia assistance and tasks Patrols Recent changes Counter-Vandalism Unit Accessibility Organizations category
Awards and feedback	Reward board Contests A nice cup of tea and a sit down Charitableness WikiLove Compliment before criticism Kindness Campaign Thanks!
Maintenance tasks	Task Center Open tasks Backlog Category Admin category Edit requests Category Database reports Category tracker Dusty articles Special pages New pages Recent changes Controversial issues
Administrators and noticeboards	Administrators' noticeboard Incidents Edit warring Vandalism Admin dashboard Admin requests Closure Page protection User permissions Sockpuppets Open proxies Revision deletion Oversight Request Usernames Changing Title blacklist OTRS Bureaucrats' Requests for adminship and bureaucratship Arbitration Committee Requests Enforcement
Content dispute resolution	Requests for comment Third opinion Dispute resolution noticeboard Biographies of living persons Conflict of interest External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view No original research Reliable sources
Other noticeboards and assistance	Regional notice boards Requests for help Category Asking questions Teahouse Help desk Reference desk Adopt-a-user Copyright assistance Copyright investigations Text problems Media questions Resource requests Mergers History mergers Moves Page importation Spam Blacklist Whitelist Bots Education General sanctions Editor sanctions Long-term abuse
Deletion discussions	Guide Admin Today Articles Templates Files Categories Redirects Miscellany Speedy Proposed BLP Review Undeletion Arguments to avoid Arguments to make Article Rescue
Elections and voting	Requests for comment (meta) Wikimedia Foundation elections WP Democracy Voting is not evil Milestones
Directories, indexes, and summaries	Departments Edit summary legend Editor's index Essays FAQs Glossary Abbreviations Help Manual of Style Simplified Rules Five pillars Policies Guidelines Shortcuts Templates Citation templates Tips Today Tools Wiki markup
Media Category Templates

What not to list here

Instructions for discussion participation

Instructions for closing discussions

Old discussions

Discussions approaching conclusion

October 9

Recent nominations

October 10

October 11

October 12

October 13

October 14

October 15

October 16

Footer