Wikipedia:Files for discussion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Wikipedia:FFD)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Files for discussion (FfD) is for listing images and other media files which are 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 no objections to deletion or removal have been 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  • Obsolete – The file has been replaced by a better version.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.
  • 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 an OTRS 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

To list a file:

1
Edit the file page.

Add {{ffd|log=2018 November 19}} 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. Also, add {{ffd|log=2018 November 19}} 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:fdw|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:fdw-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=2018 November 19}} 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 1920, not 1926.
  • 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.

Administrator instructions

Instructions for discussion participation[edit]

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

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

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

Instructions for closing discussions[edit]

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

Old discussions[edit]

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

For older nominations, see the archives.

Discussions approaching conclusion

Recent nominations[edit]

November 13[edit]

File:EAST Reactor Photo.jpg[edit]

File:EAST Reactor Photo.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Alextrevelian 006 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Free image: File:EAST Tokamak vacuum vessel 2015.jpg Shizhao (talk) 07:04, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Uploads by Mull0329[edit]

Mull0329 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
File:Umdlib2.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs)
File:Swensonlobby.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs)
File:Umdlib.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs)
File:Maloskystadium.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs)
File:Kirbyplaza-night.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs)
File:LendleyBlack wiki2.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)
File:LendleyBlack wiki1.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

Conflicting claims of authorship - this user credits the University of Minnesota-Duluth but also uses the {{self}} template. --B (talk) 02:31, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

I would guess that Mull0329 (talk · contribs) may have been an employee of the University of Minnesota Duluth, which may be why they used the {{self}} template and then also cited the source as being the institution. What is done in that instance? Randomeditor1000 (talk) 16:15, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:51, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep. The information is not conflicting per se, as Randomeditor1000 points out. I checked a few and couldn't find a previous publication online. Going by that, they are likely not copyvios. Please re-nominate if you can find these published somewhere prior to us. Also, should be moved to Commons. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 09:28, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:37, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete. WP:OTRS is required to verify that the uploader is an employee of the University of Minnesota Duluth and has the authority to upload these photos under free licenses. File:Umdlib2.png exists here in a higher resolution (1800×1187), which doesn't fair well against Finnusertop's assertion that these are previously unpublished. xplicit 05:53, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:04, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
    • @Finnusertop: Even if an image isn't previously published, if the copyright is owned by anyone other than the uploader themselves, we need a statement of permission from that copyright holder. Example, my brother is an amateur photographer and has some amazing photographs. If I were to upload something from him, and credit him, even though he has never published the photo anywhere, we still need a statement of permission. Even if this person is an employee of the school, you normally have to be a high-level officer in order to have the authority to issue licenses, so again, if this person has that authority, they would need to verify it via OTRS. --B (talk) 12:31, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:06, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

November 14[edit]

File:Duncan Montgomery Gray Sr.jpg[edit]

File:Duncan Montgomery Gray Sr.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by NickGeorge1993 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Querying use of PD-US over a Not renewed as the image dates to 1944. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:41, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:19, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:06, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Hotel-Dunapartft.jpg[edit]

File:Hotel-Dunapartft.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Tamas Szabo (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

"Szabó Ervin Könyvtár permits non commercial use" but licensed as CC-BY-SA,Image may be PD by date, but needs clarification. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:44, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:19, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:06, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Thoonga nagaram movie latest posters.jpg[edit]

File:Thoonga nagaram movie latest posters.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Villain18 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Violates WP:NFCC#8 as it is a soundtrack image being used in a film article. Also, it is watermarked. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:50, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Replace with a non-watermarked image. Could use the cover image from this Spotify Album which is from the same album but just slightly different image (but it's still for the same album), also it doesn't have a watermark. --Atomicdragon136 (talk) 01:53, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Trout Flies designed by Richard Walker.JPG[edit]

File:Trout Flies designed by Richard Walker.JPG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Adrian freer (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

I think these might qualify as works of art Ronhjones  (Talk) 17:57, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

November 15[edit]

File:I Will Survive 1993.jpg[edit]

File:I Will Survive 1993.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Wherelovelives (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This image is of the 1993 re-release of "I Will Survive". It fails to comply both WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8; one of other front covers and sleeves of original release should be sufficient enough for readers' understanding of the song. George Ho (talk) 20:45, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

The record cover consists only of letters. It may not meet the threshold of originality to qualify for copyright protection. See Template:PD-simple. — MShabazz Talk/Stalk 13:32, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Look closer, Malik. The background has possibly copyrightable symbols and design pattern(s), seen in the 1993 re-releases. George Ho (talk) 19:09, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
The background design appears to consist of the letter G (upright and inverted). I don't hold myself out to be a copyright expert, but I don't know if there's sufficient original content to consider this record cover eligible for copyright protection, although I also understand taking a cautious approach. — MShabazz Talk/Stalk 20:12, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Having said that, common sense certainly supports the concept behind NFCC 8. Quite apart from the copyright issue, I think it's questionable whether including such a generic record cover in the article adds anything that enhances readers' understanding of the subject, but that's a matter to discuss on the article's talk page. — MShabazz Talk/Stalk 20:18, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
The threshold of originality in the UK is very low. Kee Scott Associates made the sleeve and is a British company. Also, Polydor Records is British. It is potentially copyrighted in the UK, but I guess I'm unsure about it being so in the US. George Ho (talk) 20:24, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Thank you that link. I find the caption to the image of the book cover here quite relevant: a book cover consisting merely of stylized text is in the public domain in the US but likely wouldn't be in the UK. As I wrote, I'm not a copyright expert; I don't know whether US copyright law applies because Wikipedia's servers are in the US or whether UK copyright law applies because the record was issued in the UK. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:54, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Generally, enwiki cares only about copyrightability in the US.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:15, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Meet-Mujtaba-1-213x300.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media'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 16:09, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Meet-Mujtaba-1-213x300.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Usman2k4u (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Image is copyright protected. So said The Great Wiki Lord. (talk) 15:32, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

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

File:SnakeNutCan.JPG[edit]

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

"Popular nonbranded product" does not equal public domain. Photo was also lifted from a party costume website. Lord Belbury (talk) 18:17, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Cristhian Rivera.jpg[edit]

File:Cristhian Rivera.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by 11S117 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Credited to Des Moines Register, although likely the work of the local sheriff who carried out the arrest. Not federal government work. GMGtalk 20:32, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Mark-Manson-Headshot-2016.jpg[edit]

File:Mark-Manson-Headshot-2016.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Aknt (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Delete: there is no verifiable permission on the source website. This page https://markmanson.net/terms-and-conditions states a commercial use is not allowed and there is a copyright notices on their pages. ww2censor (talk) 22:44, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

November 16[edit]

File:Theses on the Socialist Rural Question in Our Country.png[edit]

File:Theses on the Socialist Rural Question in Our Country.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Finnusertop (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Marked do not move to Commons, but a deletion discussion already occurred there and resulted in keep. Magog the Ogre (tc) 03:43, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Open Science Grid(Small Logo).gif[edit]

File:Open Science Grid(Small Logo).gif (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by AbhishekSinghRana (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Technically unsourced, but F4 isn't necessarily appropriate for an image uploaded under a GFDL style license in good faith. Media is not used. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:47, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Also File:Open Science Grid Consortium(Logo).jpgShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:50, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:44, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:25, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Picture of protesters using a sleeping dragon, 2007-03-08, Carnegie Mellon University.jpg[edit]

File:Picture of protesters using a sleeping dragon, 2007-03-08, Carnegie Mellon University.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jeff G. (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Useful photo, but the article is about the general activist tactic rather than this single specific performance of it in 2007. As such this copyrighted press photo doesn't meet "no free equivalent" - another photo could be taken or may already exist. (File:Mother and Son Enjoy a Lock On Together (14038965171).jpg may suffice?) Lord Belbury (talk) 15:03, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Ercildoune Homestead.jpeg[edit]

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

If this is free, then it needs links to the original web image and the license. Ronhjones  (Talk) 18:04, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

@Ronhjones: Hi, this is the first time I've uploaded an image file. The file is free, how do I attach links to the original web image and the license? Cheers Bacondrum (talk) 23:16, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
@Bacondrum: I've put in an Information template. Please change the...
"source = http://www.slv.vic.gov.au" to show the full url of the original AND
"permission =" - to add the url where the permission statement may be found.
Ronhjones  (Talk) 23:59, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
@Ronhjones:Done, cheers. Bacondrum (talk) 00:49, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

───────Now that's rather confusing...

This page says
  1. Copyright status - This work is in copyright AND
  2. Terms of use - Use of this work allowed provided the creator and SLV acknowledged. No known copyright restrictions apply.

Which appear to rather contradict each other. The other link from the image page here, says what we normally expect "The duration of copyright in published materials is generally 70 years from the death of the creator". But I cannot find any Creative Commons statement, so my view is that it will have to go. Let's see what others think. Ronhjones  (Talk) 01:27, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

November 17[edit]

File:Digimon Hurricane Landing cut scene.jpg[edit]

File:Digimon Hurricane Landing cut scene.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Lullabying (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Non-free image being used to illustrate material removed from a movie. That stuff was trimmed is described in text so fails WP:NFCC#1. The particular point this image illustrates is a single sentence in the article and so also fails WP:NFCC#8. Whpq (talk) 14:03, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

This was one among many edits that were made/removed for the final cut. Many scenes in the film were cut and edited, including:
  1. The subplot where several characters were kidnapped
  2. Close-ups and long scenes
  3. The main characters (who are preteens) hitchhiking their way across the country (which was changed into finding transportation through a relative)
  4. A scene where one character cries at the thought of killing (it was a sad, emotional moment in the original, but made comedic in the edited version)
  5. Scenes rearranged out of order
I used the image as an example to explore a main sequence that was cut out in the final version which was important to the plot of the movie. Many news reports and reviews focus on the edited version and aren't specific as to what was cut from the original film. lullabying (talk) 16:27, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete There is no critical commentary of the image itself in the article, 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) 22:01, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:17, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
  • lullabying I am still undecided on this image. Can you explain why not having this image in the article will be causing harm to understanding of the plot ? --DBigXray 00:28, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
@DBigXray: It was a major plot point that was removed from the original movie, among other changes such as rearranged scenes and dialogue. The part where the older DigiDestined was kidnapped kickstarted the main conflict of the movie, which was removed in the edit (and was not covered by reviews/sources discussing this movie, as it is considered an "original work" separate from the original movie it was based on). lullabying (talk) 18:17, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:44, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Nicole Scherzinger on stage.png[edit]

File:Nicole Scherzinger on stage.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Ngunmo (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Only on Flickr with a PD mark. No irrevocable license. PD is not a license. Image is likely to get moved to commons and rapidly deleted with a c:Template:Flickr-public domain mark Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:27, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

November 18[edit]

File:Molecularium1.jpg[edit]

File:Molecularium1.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Vitamindk (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Old file, but text only says "Image appears on http://www.nanotoon.com but is no copyright is specified. Used here for educational purposes only for the Molecularium page.". I think this should change to a non-free image Ronhjones  (Talk) 01:49, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:10, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:59, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:38, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete. Bogus license reason. I have very little idea about what I'm even looking at. It would be impossible (for me; anyone else is free to try their luck) to write a rationale so keeping it as non-free is worthless. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 23:08, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Ruth Brown Snyder mugshot.jpg[edit]

File:Ruth Brown Snyder mugshot.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

http://www.deathhousebarber.com/photo_gallery/Sing_Sing.htm says "All Rights Reserved" Ronhjones  (Talk) 22:29, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

  • Keep. The "all rights reserved" cannot be construed to cover this photo, in which the website owner owns no copyright: it is a near-certainty that the website owner did not take the mugshot at Sing Sing prison or acquire any rights from the New York Department of Corrections. The use here, of a historic mugshot image, comports with Wikipedia guidelines as set out in WP:MUG. TJRC (talk) 23:03, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:12, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:59, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  • keep According to the article the photo was taken for her transfer to Sing Sing in 1927 (after 1923). But this would make it a work of US government employee, as his duty; then it goes under USGOV license. This instance would be opposite of en:Licence laundering, and c:Licence laundering. —usernamekiran(talk) 03:26, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Although I agree with your "keep" (as noted above; the copyright claim to the website clearly does not cover the pre-existing photo to which the web site author holds no copyright), this is not under USGOV. The mug shot is a work of the New York state government, not the United States government, and therefore the § 105 exception to copyright does not apply. See Copyright status of work by the U.S. government: State, territorial and local governments. TJRC (talk) 23:34, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:38, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete per TJRC. There is nothing by which to conclude that this is the work of the federal government rather than the likelier state government. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 23:06, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Wait, what? My position is "keep". What does "Delete per TJRC" mean? TJRC (talk) 23:58, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Ralph Lauren clothing[edit]

File:Ralph Lauren Vest.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Bi-on-ic (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).
File:Ralph Lauren Jacket.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Bi-on-ic (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Non-free images used in the Art Deco article. Together, the images fail WP:NFCC#3a as we do not need two examples of Ralph Lauren clothing. The images also fail WP:NFCC#1 as the article contains free images of art deco inspired clothing. It fails WP:NFCC#8 as there isn't significant sourced commentay about these images or the clothing depicted. Whpq (talk) 15:33, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

  • Firstly, there is no free images of art deco inspired clothing in modern fashion these two are examples of art deco clothes in today's fashion industry. secondly, we do need two examples of Ralph Lauren clothing because one is art deco tailoring and one an art deco patterned outfit. There is a difference. Bi-on-ic (talk) 15:45, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete both images, as they are not needed in the Art Deco article, and per Whpq, the images fail WP:NFCC#1 and WP:NFCC#8. Coldcreation (talk) 16:16, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:38, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete. Tailoring or patterned outfits are not discussed in the article so there is no way these could meet WP:NFCC#8. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 22:31, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

File:XTC Go 2.jpg[edit]

File:XTC Go 2.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jiy (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Non-free file may actually be free. This album cover, which consists only of typeface, does not seem to meet the threshold of originality to be eligible for copyright in the US or UK. Ilovetopaint (talk) 11:25, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Non-free. The actual text on the cover is certainly non-free. It's long and original. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 18:56, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Non-free. An image of copyrightable text is copyrightable. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk) 19:30, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Remove from XTC per WP:NFCC#8 – The article only contains a basic factual statement about the cover in the caption, not any critical commentary about the cover. — JJMC89(T·C) 20:16, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Pink Floyd - all members.jpg[edit]

File:Pink Floyd - all members.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by SilkTork (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Since two of the band members are deceased, it's no longer possible to obtain a photo of all five of these men together in one place. However we do have compatibly licensed photos of each individual person, so in my opinion the image fails WP:NFCC #1. Please see Talk:Pink Floyd#Get back the old photo for discussion that's already taken place about this image. File:Pink Floyd 68.jpg (a photo from the same photo shoot) was deleted in December 2009 as F7: Invalid fair-use rationale. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:07, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

  • Keep: there exists no free image of the band that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose (it's from the only photo-shoot of all five members). It satisfies all WP:NFCCP criteria. Coldcreation (talk) 14:21, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete, there are plenty of free images of Pink Floyd. It is not necessary that a photo include everyone who was ever in the band. If that is desired, a montage can be used. Seraphimblade Talk to me 14:25, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep - Per Coldcreation who said There is no free equivalent photo of the original Pink Floyd lineup, due to the death of two original members. - FlightTime (open channel) 14:27, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep - impossible to find a free image with all the members. Would be like having an image of the Beatles with no John Lennon. So historical that it seems that there's only one image of this nature ever produced.--Moxy (talk) 15:11, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep. This has come up for discussion previously. This meets WP:NFCC #1. " no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose". The photo shoot from which is came is documented as being the only one in which all members of the band are present, and it marks an historic turning point in the band's history. Its historic and encyclopaedic value is about as high as you can get. It can't be created today as not all band members are alive, and those that are wouldn't be willing to get together for a photo. While it is possible to have individual photos, and even to put these together to show the individual members in a montage, that is not at all the same as having an actual at the moment in time image of all the band members together at a significant point in their history. By all means replace the image in the lead with montage, if that is felt appropriate, but "Pink Floyd - all members.jpg" has a powerful and irreplaceable encyclopedic value that it is our function and duty to use, and meets legal requirements, so should be used within the article to mark that turning point in the band. It is secondary that it can also serve as a lead image, but it is handy that it does. But please don't mistake its position in the article as being the totality of its value. The image meets United States legal doctrine of fair use, and Wikipedia's own non-free content criteria. SilkTork (talk) 15:19, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep per SilkTort. It easily passes WP:NFCI#8; in a slightly tongue-in-cheek metaphor, it would be equivalent to using a Ford Fiesta to illustrate the Ford Escort article, because "it's all Ford"... ——SerialNumber54129 15:24, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep Even more historical/encyclopedic significance is in the fact that this is the one of the few photographs in existence where all members were present. That alone should merit the photo's inclusion somewhere in the body --- if it wasn't already perfect as the infobox picture. --Ilovetopaint (talk) 18:06, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete, If it is not a free image, we shouldn't have it here, as a matter of principle. This image (and 3 or 4 others of the group as a 5 piece), is found all over the web, so it is not like we're preserving the image from going extinct or something. Someday it will be a free image, and Wiki can include it then. Until then, we shouldn't have it here. Mark Froelich (talk) 00:08, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Siouxsie and the Banshees voices.jpg[edit]

File:Siouxsie and the Banshees voices.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Carliertwo (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Fails NFCC#3, 8. The fact that the same artwork was used with a different color background is more than adequately conveyed by text alone, and using two variants of the same image violates the minimal usage principle/ The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk) 19:26, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete per WP:NFCC #3 and #8. The cover is not discussed in the article and differences to the other cover could be described in prose. — JJMC89(T·C) 20:03, 18 November 2018 (UTC) 20:38, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
It's inacurrate, the cover is discussed in the article. « The artwork representing white lines on a blue monochrome, was first used on the back sleeve of the 1978 "Hong Kong Garden" single; it had been created for the band's first ever b-side "Voices" ». @ JJMC89 --- Carliertwo (talk) 20:22, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
(It looks black to me, so I originally thought that referred to the other cover.) Ok, so it is discussed, but is it not the subject of sourced critical commentary. That is just a basic (unsourced) description of the cover. — JJMC89(T·C) 20:38, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
A source has since been added in the article. This second answer is even more puzzling as the user wrote about the image that it looked black to them whereas it is a deep blue monochrome with white linha sinusoida. So in the end, there isn't WP:NFCC #3 = as one item can not convey equivalent significant information in this case and #8 either = its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding @ JJMC89Carliertwo (talk) 21:47, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep -- This backcover of a 1978 single is used to show where the design of this 2016 cd compilation comes from. It makes a significant contribution to the user's understanding of the article, which could not practically be conveyed by words alone. The image is placed in the article next to the infobox to show the primary 1978 visual image associated with the artwork, and to help the user quickly identify the genesis of the 2016 artwork. Carliertwo (talk) 20:17, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • procedural effect: The complainant Hullaballoo Wolfowitz failed to notice the uploader Carliertwo on their talkpage with {subst:fdw|1=Siouxsie and the Banshees voices.jpg} which is inadmissible and a sign of contempt. The complainant is currently in a edit war on several Siouxsie related articles and wants to keep their procedure unnoticed by the users of those articles. Carliertwo (talk) 20:33, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Samit Hota Official.jpg[edit]

File:Samit Hota Official.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by SamitHotaIn (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Out of scope personal image Magog the Ogre (tc) 19:29, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete out of scope - uploader is using the wiki as a social platform. Cabayi (talk) 19:59, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete as out of scope. I also nominated the same image on Commons for deletion for the same reason. — JJMC89(T·C) 20:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete - per nom. - FlightTime (open channel) 20:08, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Sedition, 1986.jpg[edit]

File:Sedition, 1986.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Davess (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Per Talk:Sedition (UK band)#Untitled, the file's uploader is also the photo's subject, so he's unlikely to also be the photographer and copyright holder. Would need more info if otherwise. czar 22:31, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

November 19[edit]

Footer[edit]

Today is November 19 2018. Put new nominations in Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2018 November 19 -- (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 "===November 19===" 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.