Wikipedia:Files for discussion

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

WP:FFD

XFD backlog
V	Aug	Sep	Total
CfD	3	96	99
TfD	0	2	2
MfD	1	0	1
FfD	0	6	6
RfD	0	38	38
AfD	0	29	29

Files for discussion (FfD) is for listing images and other media files which may be unneeded or have either free content or non-free content usage concerns. Files that have been listed here for more than 7 days are eligible for either deletion or removal from pages if either a consensus to do so has been reached or the nominator specifically requests deletion or removal and no objections are raised. To quote the non-free content criteria, "it is the duty of users seeking to include or retain content to provide a valid rationale; those seeking to remove or delete it are not required to show that one cannot be created." For undeletion requests, first contact the administrator who deleted the file. If you are unable to resolve the issue with that administrator, the matter should be brought to deletion review.

What not to list here[edit]

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=2023 September 26}}` 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 September 26}}` 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 September 26}}` 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}}.

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 it's copyright status, then please start a new thread at Media Copyright Questions.

Instructions for discussion participation[edit]

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

Wikipedia:NFCC#1 – Free equivalent is/is not available
Wikipedia:NFCC#8 – Significance
Wikipedia:Non-free content#Images 2 – Unacceptable image use

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

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

Instructions for closing discussions[edit]

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

Old discussions[edit]

Shortcut

WP:FFDO

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

This page has an administrative backlog that requires the attention of willing administrators.
This notice will be automatically removed by AnomieBOT (talk) when the backlog is cleared.

September 18

File:Competent-man-heinlein.jpg

[edit]

While the text may have been arranged by the uploader, there is no source for the background image of bees(?). ✗plicit 00:08, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

While it would be sufficiently altered for fair use, its original was free, anyway: https://www.peakpx.com/906/honey-bee — Kaz (talk) 02:26, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:MVRP001.JPG

[edit]

Orphaned and blurry. No foreseeable encyclopedic use. ✗plicit 06:30, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete both, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 05:38, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pakistan Football Federation logo files

[edit]

Duplicate of File:New2008 PFFlogo.png that was originally tagged for speedy deletion per WP:CSD#F1 but declined by administrator Whpq since the file is in use, who suggested it be discusssed here at FFD instead. Two non-free files are not needed for what is essentially the same logo; so, which of the two should be deleted can be decided here. "File:New2008 PFFlogo" was uploaded in 2008 and its non-free use in Pakistan Football Federation seems fine; "File:Pakistan national football team" was uploaded a few days ago and is being used in the main infobox of Pakistan national football team, which is questionable per item #17 of WP:NFC#UUI. Previous FFD/WP:NFCR discussions about this type of non-free use have generally resulted in a consensus that logos used by sports federations are considered OK for primary identification purposes in the main infobox about the federation itself (i.e. the parent entity), but are not considered OK for the main infoboxes of articles about individual national teams (i.e. the child entities) except when the logo is somehow specific to the team itself. If a consensus is established that such a non-free use is OK in this particular case for the individual team article, then so be it; however, there's still no need for two files and one of them needs to be deleted regardless. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:28, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Endwall losses in turbomachinery (cropped).jpeg

[edit]

Redundant to File:Endwall losses in turbomachinery (cropped).png, no obvious usecases specific to this image. Should be deleted. —Matr1x-101 _{(Ping me when replying)} {_{user page} ^{(@ commons)} - _talk} 16:13, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete, redundant to Commons file. Salavat (talk) 05:41, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Iran national football team logo.png

[edit]

This logo is a duplicate of another non-free logo already on Wikipedia under the name File:Iranian football badge.svg (the logo of the Football Federation Islamic Republic of Iran). I added a WP:PROD tag but it was removed by the uploader, hence I am listing it here to be removed. As a note, this logo is only permitted to be used on the Football Federation Islamic Republic of Iran page, not the Iran national football team page, per Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 February 17#File:Football Federation Islamic Republic of Iran.png. Hashim-afc (talk) 19:09, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 15

File:Yugoslav submarine Osvetnik.jpg

[edit]

The author is identified with surname and initial, which suffices not to make this an anonymous image under UK copyright law. Furthermore, the US copyright does not lapse until 2026 in any case. Felix QW (talk) 21:44, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

M. Bar is Marius Bar, a well-known French commercial naval photographer who died in 1930.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:50, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks Sturmvogel 66. Changed to PD-old-70, which is the applicable timeframe under French copyright law, given Bar was French and died in 1930. So it will become PD in the US in 2026 (95 yrs after Bar's death), but this is not at issue here, because fair use is being claimed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:12, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for that! If non-free use is claimed, one should add a non-free use license too. I am not sure what the minimal use guidelines are where an identification image is used both on the ship's class page and on the ship's own page, but I suspect that use on the sister ship's page is too much. Felix QW (talk) 07:03, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't agree it is too much. I think use on the three pages is reasonable, especially given the low quality of the image. However, you have added a UK-PD restored licence that says "This image was created and is now in the public domain in the United Kingdom". It is very unlikely that the image was created in the UK, as Bar mainly photographed ships in Toulon and some other French ports, and the submarine had its hulled cleaned at Toulon prior to delivery to the Yugoslavs and it was almost certainly photographed by him there. AFAIK, it never sailed in British waters. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:19, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is unfortunate that the template says it was "created in the UK", and in principle I am happy to change it back since in this case, restored American copyright is independent of which tag to use. Otherwise, the key location is that of first publication, and as far as we know that is in the UK. There is the additional issue that {{PD-old-70}} does not interact well with non-free licenses, which I have raised here. Felix QW (talk) 10:43, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Keep as non-free for the sub and the ship class but not the sister ship, Yugoslav submarine Smeli. -- Whpq (talk) 02:01, 23 September 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.

September 19[edit]

File:Andreadoria02.jpg[edit]

It is not clear whether the photo was published before 1989 or after. — Ирука¹³ 13:06, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:PAF F-86 Sabre 1965 War.png[edit]

Even if the photo was published in the year of production, in Pakistan it would have entered the public domain in the 2016, which is after 1996. — Ирука¹³ 15:08, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Recent nominations[edit]

September 20[edit]

File:Bmp data format.svg[edit]

Orphaned, superseded by File:Bmp format.svg on Commons. ✗plicit 02:25, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete, redundant to Commons file. Salavat (talk) 05:44, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Nilescene.jpg[edit]

Higher resolution images exist on Commons. — Ирука¹³ 06:40, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Benito Mussolini Roman Salute.jpg[edit]

It is unknown whether this photo was published before or after 1989. — Ирука¹³ 07:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It needs better sourcing but this 1930s photograph is likely to have been published before 1989. Abzeronow (talk) 18:49, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Manchester Town Hall windows.JPG[edit]

Unused "keep local"-file available on Commons. — Ирука¹³ 07:24, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Dave Burnaby.jpg[edit]

These images are hosted under the premise that they were published anonymously in a 1938 UK publication, "Film Star Who's Who on the screen", and thus in the public domain. This is problematic for two reasons, as firstly Commons discussions have concluded that these images are usually taken from films, voiding the anonymous publication claim; more importantly, they would all be copyrighted in the US anyway since the URAA restored their copyright until 2034. None of them are in use. See also the previous discussion here. Felix QW (talk) 13:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete all, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 05:46, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete them and add to Category:Future copyright expiration as copyright expires soon. The Quirky Kitty (talk) 16:58, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Arminonegroshot1.jpg[edit]

The film from which the screenshot is taken entered the public domain in Argentina in 2004, which is after 1996. — Ирука¹³ 14:32, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:VKM WWE HOF.png[edit]

An unused portrait cut with a live original and many potential replacements. — Ирука¹³ 14:50, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 05:47, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:The Internationale French.mp3[edit]

Even if this melody is in the public domain, the performance is clearly not. This is because the melody and performance have separate copyrights. Therefore this fails NFCC no.1 since a free alternative could be created. —Matr1x-101 _{(Ping me when replying)} {_{user page} ^{(@ commons)} - _talk} 16:47, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 21[edit]

File:Saint Lucy, Siracusan.jpg[edit]

There is no evidence to confirm the age of the image. — Ирука¹³ 10:32, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete, unless evidence of the age can be established. Salavat (talk) 05:48, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:EarthWind&Fire - September 99.jpg[edit]

This article already has one non-free piece of media and this one is not adding anything educational or that is being critically discussed per WP:NFCC. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:50, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:F sharp a sharp infinity vinyl cover street sighn.jpg[edit]

There is way too much non-free media on this page and additional album covers are not adding anything of educational value or that are being discussed critically and that require these images, per WP:NFCC. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:30, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:One of the three album covers from the vinyl edition of (F sharp, A sharp, infinity sign), by Godspeed You! Black Emperor.jpg[edit]

There is way too much non-free media on this page and additional album covers are not adding anything of educational value or that are being discussed critically and that require these images, per WP:NFCC. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:31, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Beti Bachao Beti Padhao logo.svg[edit]

Poor quality logo vectorization. — Ирука¹³ 16:25, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I will improve the image quality and upload it as soon as possible. VNC200 (talk) 17:17, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Argo Axum.jpg[edit]

The photo was published only in 1999, not PD in the US. — Ирука¹³ 16:46, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 22[edit]

File:Poornima indrajith.jpg[edit]

The picture is obviously taken by Poornima Indrajith herself and it does not appear to have been uploaded by her. Most probably poached from one of her social media page Jupitus Smart 03:32, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete, unless evidence of permission can be established. Salavat (talk) 05:51, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:The Cats Paw.jpg[edit]

This image is taken from a US film, so its first publication would be the US rather than the UK. If anyone has an easier way to check film renewals than trawling through PDF scans, it could be worth looking up the renewal records to check whether this motion picture is in the public domain due to non-renewal; otherwise, I doubt this image would satisfy the non-free content criteria. Felix QW (talk) 10:07, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:PulcinellaGuitar.jpg[edit]

The source link looks like "http://napolibella.bravepages.com/Riproduzioni/Martucci%20Antonio/Pulcinella.jpg". The artist with that name was born in 1934 and is probably still alive. — Ирука¹³ 12:48, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Otto frank physiologist.jpg[edit]

The source given is a scientific journal article from 2009. The author of that article is given as Author of the image. This is clearly nonsense since the person in the picture, Otto Frank, died 1944. So the picture must be from that year or earlier. Even if it was him, the article has copyright: International Federation for Medical and Biological Engineering. But it seems that the author of the article just found the image somewhere and copied it without permission. No clue how this could have been published here under a CC license. I wish we could keep it, but I don't think so. Skopien (talk) 14:41, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not an expert on copyright but the relevant article states:

Rights and permissions Open Access This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0 ), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited. so my understanding is that the copyright doesn't belong to International Federation for Medical and Biological Engineering. The author or his institution will have paid for the CC licence. I suppose it's possible that the photograph was the property of the author of the article. Adh (talk) 15:01, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Unfortunately, the Open Access license would not be of much help since we do not accept non-commercial licenses on Wikipedia. However, it is very unlikely that the author of the article is the copyright holder of this image. Tineye finds a more complete version as an autograph card, so we can be pretty sure that it would be published in the sense of American law. Unfortunately, we have nothing to indicate that it has been published more than 95 years ago, so this does not show that the image is now in the public domain in the US. Felix QW (talk) 17:23, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The image looks very similar to https://beckerarchives.wustl.edu/VC090-i090110 although cut down. If this is correct it implies that it may have been published in 1940. Adh (talk) 22:05, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Great find! That's certainly it, which unfortunately makes this image copyrighted in the US until 2036. Felix QW (talk) 13:28, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Da Barbiano at Venice.jpg[edit]

There is no evidence that the photo was published before 1989. — Ирука¹³ 15:53, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ship was sunk at the Battle of Cape Bon, 13 December 1941, as time travel hasn't been invented, common sense would suggest publication before 1989. Picture itself was taken July 18, 1934. W C M_email 07:18, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your common sense. My common sense says that the photo lay in the archives until 1991. — Ирука¹³ 09:41, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And of course you have evidence that is the case? Please share. [1] The ultimate source of that picture is the Italian Defence Ministry. And whilst it is a crap website, google confirms that is the case. I don't see any reason to delete here. W C M_email 13:12, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have no evidence. And you have no evidence. Information without evidence remains outside of Wikipedia.

I don’t understand what you are trying to prove by providing a link to the main page of the Italian Defence Ministry. — Ирука¹³ 13:48, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So your nomination has no basis, just your suspicions? [2] That image was posted on the defence ministry website, I told you how to find it. W C M_email 14:11, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, my nomination "has no basis". Just like the file has no basis to be on en-Wikipedia.

Okay, the photo was posted on the defence ministry website, and? — Ирука¹³ 14:52, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A photograph from 1934 has every right to be used on Wikipedia, this is a nomination without any value. I note the original poor quality print was overwritten by you only 3 days ago. I'm done here, this should be a speedy close as keep. W C M_email 15:16, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:CuidadoMujeres1.jpg[edit]

A screenshot from a film goes into the public domain under different rules than a photograph. — Ирука¹³ 16:00, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 23[edit]

File:Wilson Coleman.jpg[edit]

Not PD in the US until 2034 as a 1938 image published abroad that was still in copyright at the URAA restoration date in the UK. Felix QW (talk) 21:47, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could probably be converted to non-free use at Wilson Coleman, unless a truly free image can be found. Felix QW (talk) 19:34, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for comments on conversion to non-free usage.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Whpq (talk) 02:02, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just for clarification: I have not found a free image and would be happy with non-free use here. Felix QW (talk) 13:29, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Fire & Movement magazine, 10th anniversary edition, number 49, July-Aug 1986, cover page, Trial of Strength.jpg[edit]

The image is not in the public domain in Australia as it was published after 1980. — Ирука¹³ 18:23, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Louis X of France (1289 – 1316).jpg[edit]

The image does not have any data to indicate its licensing status. — Ирука¹³ 18:54, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:CantZ506.jpg[edit]

The date of publication of the image is unknown, and there is no indirect evidence about this. = licensing status in the US is indeterminable. — Ирука¹³ 19:18, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 24[edit]

File:BER basic pathway.jpg[edit]

Unused image, replaced by the author himself with the SVG version. — Ирука¹³ 11:20, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete, redundant to SVG file. Salavat (talk) 02:29, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Discovery Turbo.svg[edit]

The file has low encyclopedic value for article Discovery Turbo, and should either be relicensed as {{PD-ineligible-USonly}} or deleted per WP:NFCC#8. — Ирука¹³ 11:30, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:MS Augustus.jpg[edit]

The fact that the photo was published before 1989 has not been confirmed. — Ирука¹³ 14:03, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 25[edit]

File:Lillian Gunter's Notebook 1.jpg[edit]

The source states, "This photograph's creation, acceptance, or submission date is unknown." There is no evidence of a a free license. ✗plicit 02:29, 10 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comment, potentially relicense to non-free biog pic for use on the Lillian Gunter article only as there isn't a free alternative available at this time. Salavat (talk) 04:09, 10 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Comment. Gunter died in 1926, so the photograph must have been made before 1928. However I don't think we yet know when the photograph was first published or displayed. pburka (talk) 15:43, 10 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It clearly looks like a formal studio photo to me, and those used to be considered published as soon as copies were distributed from the photographer to the client. So in my eyes we should be able to relicense this as {{PD-US-expired}}. Felix QW (talk) 15:22, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete This was created by an anonymous photographer and was only recently published. As per c:Commons:Hirtle chart, the only safe thing to do is to wait 120y from creation. Since we also don't have an exact date of creation, given Lillian Gunter died in 1926, this can't be legitimately PD until 1926+120 = 2046). More context available at this DR. -FASTILY 21:11, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to get more input on whether conversion to non-free use is appropriate.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Whpq (talk) 14:18, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relicense to {{PD-US-expired}} based on @Felix QW's rationale. The Quirky Kitty (talk) 16:56, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Pogon-logoNEW.svg[edit]

Going by the copyright law mentioned on commons:File:Pogon-logoNEW.svg it's not clear that this logo would be copyrightable. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:48, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Koenigsegg logo.svg[edit]

On Commons this file is considered to be uncopyrightable. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:01, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Assyrian state proposed during World War I.jpg[edit]

Bottom of the image says "All rights reserved", quality looks like a scan. Questionable licencing. —Matr1x-101 _{(Ping me when replying)} {_{user page} ^{(@ commons)} - _talk} 16:56, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete - It looks like the uploader took a copyrighted map and coloured some lines using highlighter markers. At best, a derivative work based on a copyrighted map. -- Whpq (talk) 20:54, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Gardevoir by jtveemo.jpg[edit]

Fails WP:FREER - it would be possible to create a free equivalent of this image that serves the same purpose, simply by an artist releasing their art into the public domain. It's also pretty arguable that it falls under WP:GRATUITOUS, though that's not the main reason there is a problem. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:43, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Zxcvbnm: how would it be possible to create a free alternative if all Pokémon characters are copyrighted? Skyshifter ^talk 21:06, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Skyshifter: The last sentence of WP:FREER states that a freely released image of a copyrighted subject is preferable to an image with 2 copyrights, that of the fan-artist and that of the original character's creator. So, it still applies even though Pokemon themselves have a copyright. Simply having "released the image publicly on their social media" does not demonstrate that it is in the public domain or has been released under a free license. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:12, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ah, that makes sense. I hadn't thought of it. Skyshifter ^talk 21:23, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Sancho II of Pamplona (2).jpg[edit]

There is a higher contrast, higher resolution image. — Ирука¹³ 20:44, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete The other one is basically the same, just better. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:50, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 26[edit]

File:NVidia GeForce 9 Series.jpg[edit]

This GeForce 9 series logo features old Nvidia wordmark, which was replaced by current Nvidia wordmark. Also, this logo was derived from the GeForce 7 series logo. HarmonZach (talk) 01:26, 26 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Footer[edit]

Today is September 26 2023. Put new nominations in Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2023 September 26 – (new nomination)

If the current date's page has been started without the header, apply {{subst:Ffd log}} to the top of the day's page.

Please ensure "===September 26===" 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 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 Version 1.0 Editorial Team 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 votings	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