Wikipedia:Files_for_discussion References

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

WP:FFD

XFD backlog
V	Mar	Apr	Total
CfD	2	20	22
TfD	0	7	7
MfD	0	1	1
FfD	0	0	0
RfD	0	49	49
AfD	0	2	2

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 April 23}}` 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 April 23}}` 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 April 23}}` 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 it's 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:

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.

April 16

File:Komagata Maru Charterer Gurdit Singh and Passengers Landing.jpg

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 by Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

A cropped lower resolution version of File:Sikhs aboard Komagata Maru.jpg. Magog the Ogre ( t • c) 00:46, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply

OK, thanks for bringing this to my attention. Let's delete File:Komagata Maru Charterer Gurdit Singh and Passengers Landing.jpg UpDater ( talk) 03:43, 16 April 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:Lynyrd SkynyrdFreeBirdSolo.ogg

De-PRODding reason from an admin was this: The article states that this is one of the greatest guitar solos of all time. It IS the song, the heart of it. This implies that, per WP:NFC#Audio clips, critical commentary should suffice to save the sample from deletion. However, even with critical commentary, I still doubt that the whole sample itself is significant contextually to the whole nine- or ten-minute song.

The whole sample sure is a portion of "one of the greatest guitar solos", but the whole song (recording) is not about that guitar solo, even as "greatest" as it may have been. The song has lyrics lasting five, six, or seven minutes.

Furthermore, the phrase "one of the greatest guitar solos" and the whole sample provide the same role: driving a reader into seeking the whole, full studio recording... or live one of the same song and letting the reader decide for oneself. Moreover, the 30-second sample either doesn't fully explain why the whole guitar solo is the "greatest" or is more about the portion itself than about the whole guitar solo (or the whole song).

Or, words are enough per WP:FREER to explain (what) the whole song (is about) or... (that) the whole song (is more than just the "greatest guitar solo"), and the sample itself doesn't need to be in the project. Speaking of "greatest", "greatest" can be subjective, yet the sample isn't that adequate, in my opinion. The whole recording at any length does the better explanation than any sample/portion.

In short, even meeting "critical commentary" rule doesn't absolve the sample's potential failures to comply with the whole NFCC, especially the "contextual significance" one. George Ho ( talk) 04:56, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:James Brown - It's a Man's Man's Man's World.ogg

De-PRODded for this reason: Annulation de suppression d'audio. L'audio permet au lecteur de connecter la chanson avec l'article en associant le titre à un extrait de la chanson. Helping readers identify the James Brown song It's a Man's Man's Man's World isn't sufficient to absolve the sample's potential failures to be contextually significant the whole song (recording). Rather it does the same thing that free text can do: drive readers into seeking and listening the whole song.

Furthermore, nothing in the sample indicates why omitting the sample from the article would harm readers' understanding of the whole song, honestly. Regardless of familiarity and legacy, I hear lyrics, and music simultaneously, and I hear performance. However, the content given is all I hear, and I still haven't found the sample to fulfillingly help me understand the whole song. Oh, and understanding ≠ identifying. George Ho ( talk) 05:08, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:Get Ready For This - 2 Unlimited.ogg

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: relisted on 2024 April 23. ✗ plicit 14:17, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:Get Ready For This - 2 Unlimited.ogg ( delete | talk | history | links | logs)

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:Please Myself pink cover.jpg

There is a version below TOO in the file history. Surely if the album can be represented by something non-copyrightable then the recent non-free upload with the same name fails WP:NFCC#1. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:44, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply

I had to look up "TOO", so here is a link for anyone who's not a FFD regular: WP:TOO.
Is it only the recent version at this file name, of a B&W photo in a pink frame, that would be deleted? thereby reverting this image to the square of pink with a few Chinese characters in the centre? I have no objection to that outcome. I don't think I'd ever seen the framed image before the 2023 Pitchfork article cited in Please Myself. E.g. auction listings for this album generally show either the pink square or a different colour photo shown here. – Fayenatic London 11:01, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Yes, that is indeed what I'm requesting. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:36, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply
@ Nkon21: when uploading images, I think it would be good practice to use a new file name, rather than making it a new version of an existing file if it does not look the same. – Fayenatic London 11:01, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Yes I should have, therefore I re-uploaded the file just yesterday. As a result, this file is now redundant and can be removed. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 23:44, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:The-Ikettes.jpg

Could be from https://www.gettyimages.com.au/detail/news-photo/ike-and-tina-turner-backup-singers-and-recording-artists-news-photo/117646990 because it is in the same format but covered with a watermark. May fail WP:GETTY. TheGreatestLuvofAll ( talk) 20:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply

The source even says it is from Michael Ochs archives. [1] TheGreatestLuvofAll ( talk) 22:39, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:Peter Gabriel & Kate Bush - Don't Give Up.ogg

File was de-PRODded per "critical commentary" rationale. However, per WP:NFC#Audio clips, NFCC also applies. As far as the sample is concerned, I hear lyrics, vocal performances, and music. Nothing within the sample indicates why, per WP:NFCC#8, omitting the whole portion harms understanding of the whole song, which has been redone a few or several times by later artists. Furthermore, the free text already helps readers learn what the whole song is about, meaning the sample fails to be irreplaceable by free text. Furthermore, the sample might also fail WP:NFCC#3a for doing the same role that free text does: drive readers into seeking and then listening various recordings of the same song. George Ho ( talk) 20:55, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Recent nominations

April 17

File:A Bibliography of Conjuring Periodicals in English, 1791–1983 book cover.png

The cover has a very simple design and is therefore not copyrightable. Someone can take a picture of the book and release the photo under a free license. Ixfd64 ( talk) 02:40, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:Bill Cipher.jpg

Although this file is accompanied by critical commentary, the commentary is not about the depicted scene but rather about the depicted character Bill Cipher, thus failing both WP:NFCC#3b (minimal extent of use) and WP:NFCC#8 (contextual significance). Per MOS:TVIMAGE, a screenshot of a significant moment or element from the episode ... may only be used if it meets the non-free content criteria, i.e., (typically) if it is required to illustrate the object of explicit, sourced analytical commentary, and where that commentary needs visual support to be understood. This image can easily be replaced with an image depicting only the character himself, which would more likely meet both WP:NFCC criteria. JohnCWiesenthal ( talk) 03:32, 10 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep: the "critical commentary" discusses the début of the character, which is an important feature of the episode. That is, it discusses the idea "début of Bill Cipher" (important scene of episode) rather than the idea "character named Bill Cipher". Cremastra ( talk) 22:08, 12 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 06:46, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply

April 18

File:The Wolverine posterUS.jpg

This poster's role of identifying The Wolverine (film) can be achieved with c:File:The Wolverine Trailer Exclusive (2013).webm, a freely-licensed promotional trailer on Commons. JohnCWiesenthal ( talk) 00:20, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

In what way does a trailer better achieve a quick visual identification of the movie than an image of the poster? Poster images are the standard way of identifying movies in this top image. If you feel the trailer is worth including in the article consider imbedding it further down the page, underneath the quick facts side bar for example. I am not convinced there is any legitimate argument for replacing the poster image with a video file as a quick identifying image. AJRitchieCreates ( talk) 11:10, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Strong oppose and speedy close Eh? Please read WP:FILMPOSTER. And how is this thumbnail image of the trailer recognizable or representative of the film?? InfiniteNexus ( talk) 23:20, 20 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep per above. If a poster exist, it should be used/prioritized. Don't use the technicalities of any rule to make an article worse. WP:COMMONSENSE. Neocorelight ( Talk) 10:37, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:Champaign Urbana Mass Transit District Logo.png

The image was designed in Illinois, USA, and the design is too simple to meet the threshold for copyright protection. Fumikas Sagisavas ( talk) 07:20, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:OTMA.jpg

Orphaned, superseded by File:OTMA in 1914.jpg on Commons. ✗ plicit 14:33, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:Frisianlonghouse.png

Orphaned, superseded by File:Langhuis.jpg on Commons. Ineligible for speedy deletion due to different file formats. ✗ plicit 14:35, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:Anguilla Commonwealth Games.png

This is the logo of the Anguilla Commonwealth Games Association, not of the participating country of Anguilla, which uses the country's flag as the primary emblem. As such, it's not a logo of the entity in question (and the association doesn't have a Wikipedia article), and so fails WP:NFCC#8. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 15:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:Bahamas Commonwealth Games.png

This is the logo of the Bahamas Commonwealth Games Association, not of the participating country of Bahamas, which uses the country's flag as the primary emblem. As such, it's not a logo of the entity in question (and the association doesn't have a Wikipedia article), and so fails WP:NFCC#8. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 15:17, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:Anitta's anal tattoo.png

Violation of privacy. According to the article, this photo was leaked rather than made public by the subject. Kk.urban ( talk) 15:52, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:Kangaroo Bay.jpg

A painting which from the State Library of Tasmania which they variously credit to artist F.J. Lloyd (d. 1956) (for instance on this instagram post) or treat as the work of an unknown artist (as on this blog entry). Since the latest attribution to F. J. Lloyd is from 8 weeks ago, I would tend not to treat it as an anonymous work but as a work by Lloyd, which would then be under copyright in Australia until 2026 inclusive. Whether it is still in copyright in the US would depend on its publication history, and thus whether it was catalogued or exhibited somewhere where copies could be made freely. Unfortunately, I was unable to find anything on its exhibition history, and it is unlikely to be common knowledge given the present uncertainty about its authorship. Felix QW ( talk) 15:57, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:Kearley Calcutta.jpg

Painting by Dacre Smyth (1923-2008). While the exact date of creation is not given, it will certainly have been after 1928, and Australian copyright will still run until 2078 inclusive. While the file is in use in three articles, I doubt that a modern depiction of a historical event over 200 years ago satisfies the criteria for non-free content. Felix QW ( talk) 16:08, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:Kearney 1953.jpg

US copyright in this 1953 Australian image was restored by the URAA restoration in 1996. It is in use at Ken Kearney, together with File:Ken Kearney.JPG, another non-free (URAA-restored) image. Presumably, either of them is sufficient for identification, so unless this file is deemed preferable to File:Ken Kearney.JPG for some reason, it would probably have to be deleted. Felix QW ( talk) 16:13, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:Undertale-sans-fight.gif

This is a disputed CSD F7 nomination. This GIF depicts a final boss battle in Undertale (2015). Its usage in the article " Megalovania" — the soundtrack for this section of the game — does not meet criterion 8 (contextual significance) of the NFCC. I also feel that a 15-second clip is too excessive to meet criterion 3b (minimal extent of use). The NFCI allow for images which "are themselves the subject of sourced commentary" (emphasis original); the article's commentary mostly pertains to the music and not the visual aspects. Delete. — TechnoSquirrel69 ( sigh) 19:11, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Creator Keep A significant part of the reception for the Undertale version of the track, as stated, is due to the intensity of the Sans Genocide Route fight in the game. Given the tendency for the track to be associated with that, and by extension this character, it serves as the best means to convey to the reader what exactly that part of the subject is.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 22:46, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep per above as my watchlist alerted me. It should be fine with the first paragraph commentaries. 🥒 Greenish Pickle!🥒 ( 🔔) 00:11, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

I'd urge you to explain why you believe the first paragraph is fine. As I mentioned in my nomination statement, there is no significant discussion of the actual battle nor any of its visuals in the article's prose, which naturally focuses on the music. The only text that could be considered related is the image's caption, which is a circular argument for keeping, not even to mention that it's unsourced. — TechnoSquirrel69 ( sigh) 01:39, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep per others. The Reception discusses Megalovania in association with the intensity of the fight. The GIF displays the opening portion of Sans's fight, which is probably the best method of actually showing the intensity visually, and how Megalovania works alongside it. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 ( talk) 04:35, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

April 19

File:Armenia–OSCE office logo.jpg

Invalid FUR. Asserted to be used as a logo but File:OSCE_logo.svg exists. Fails NFCC1. -- Min☠︎rax^{«¦
talk¦»} 02:38, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete as per nom, fails WP:NFCC#1 as File:OSCE logo.svg exists and is a free logo. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 07:59, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:2024 Lok Sabha elections logo.png

Doesn't significantly enhance the reader's understanding, so fails WP:NFCC#8. Generally when we use non free logos, we put them in the infobox if they're important, but we have much more important, free images of the main party leaders in the infobox, which provide way more understanding to a reader than this logo. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 06:55, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:True Files Lee Kim Lai 1.jpg

The file is a screenshot of a television re-enactment of the murder of Lee Kim Lai, which is used in the article List of Singapore police officers killed in the line of duty. As a list to record Singaporean fallen police officers, his case is not the main topic of the article (had every fallen officers deserve their images, the article would have been full of fair-use images). While the description is relatively long, most of them are to translate the Chinese appearing in the file.

In short, the file is only used as a replaceable illustration in the article, and as a re-enactment its value is even less when compared with true historical images. The file therefore violates WP:NFCC#8, and should be deleted. 廣九直通車 ( talk) 13:24, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:Tanah Merah Accident.jpg

The file is a television screenshot of a traffic accident in Singapore involving police officers, and is used in List of Singapore police officers killed in the line of duty. As a list to record Singaporean fallen police officers, his case is not the main topic of the article (see also the comments in #File:True Files Lee Kim Lai 1.jpg), and its omission would not be detrimental to the readers' understanding.

Moreover, WP:NFC#UUI point 7 states that photo from press agency are unacceptable fair use unless it is the subject of sourced commentary in the article. As an illustration in the article that solely to demonstrate "2 police officers died in an accident", the file is clearly not the subject of sourced commentary.

In short, the file violates WP:NFCC8# and WP:NFC#UUI, and should therefore be deleted. 廣九直通車 ( talk) 13:30, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete per nom. Queen of ♡ | speak 22:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

April 20

File:Buzz Lightyear.png

Although Toy Story's Buzz Lightyear is currently protected by copyright, and although it won't be protected by copyright until 2101 or later, try to avoid using fair use images if there are free copyrighted images, currently in Commons has a Buzz Lightyear statue in Shanghai, China, which is considered a freely licensed image for FoP reasons. The image of the statue is also close in size to the fair use image. Fumikas Sagisavas ( talk) 09:08, 20 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Comment - Presuming this is the image being referred to, the lighing on the image could cause visibility issues. (Oinkers42) ( talk) 21:19, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Seconding Oinkers here. The darkness obscures the face of the character greatly. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 ( talk) 02:25, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

April 21

File:Dragon Fish, C418, 2018.jpg

Originally nominated for speedy deletion by @ TechnoSquirrel69 with the reason: "My concerns that got this file deleted previously still exist. This cover art seems to a represent a single, not the album." Fastily 06:55, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:This is the front cover art for the book The Toughest Man who Ever Lived written by Nori Bunasawa and John Murray.jpg

Non-free book cover being used in a WP:DECORATIVE manner in Nori Bunasawa#Career. Non-free book covers are generally allowed to be used for primary identification purposes in stand-alone articles about the books they represent, but there use in other articles is generally only allowed when the cover itself is the subject of sourced critical commentary as explained in WP:NFC#cite_note-3 and the context for non-free use required by WP:NFCC#8 is evident. There is no such critical commentary of the cover anywhere in the article (simply mentioning the book by name isn't sufficient) and the cover is also being used in a gallery of images which is not allowed per WP:NFG. For reference, I prodded the file for deletion here, but it was subsequently WP:DEPRODed by the uploader here without any explanation why; so, I'm bringing its non-free use up for further discussion here at FFD. Marchjuly ( talk) 12:01, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

April 22

File:Parannoul - Beautiful World.ogg

skeptical about the sample's contextual significance to the whole album, even with a caption and an inline reference. furthermore, role to drive a reader into listening the whole track/recording already fulfilled by free text. furthermore, the album cover art already tells readers what to expect from the album itself. George Ho ( talk) 09:39, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep I've added more commentary about the song in the caption, sourced. I think an audio file is almost always very important to album articles. Music is extremely hard to explain with text alone. I think the audio helps the reader significantly in understanding the album's composition. Skyshifter talk 10:51, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep. The sample is one representative of the album's sound, and it has commentaries. The album cover literally tells nothing about anything. Neocorelight ( Talk) 11:22, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply
- Oh, I forgot to respond to that. Agree, it's absolutely impossible to tell what to expect of the album (or any album) just from the cover art. Skyshifter talk 12:33, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep. Fortunately, we don't have to follow nominator's skepticism and his interpretation of "contextual significance", when we have a guideline Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Music samples which clearly states:
"This is necessary to meet the "Contextual significance" requirement for use of non-free content: 1) the item [song or portion of] is itself the subject of sourced commentary in the article, or 2) where only by including such non-free content, can the reader identify an object, style, or behavior, that is a subject of discussion in the article".
There is commentary about the song itself (which is part of the album), the commentary is sourced, and the sample is important to identify the style of music on the album (no, a drawing on the cover says nothing about the album's sound). AstonishingTunesAdmirer 連絡 01:25, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:The Governor (Comic Series).jpg

A comic depiction of the character is already in the infobox. Having another one violates purpose of use ( WP:NFCC#8) and maybe also minimal use (NFCC#3). Neocorelight ( Talk) 11:01, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:Ariana Grande - Problem (feat. Iggy Azalea).png

This cover art fails WP:NFCC#1 (no free equivalent) because the Saudi Arabian release contains a simple cover art design (see here). The Saudi cover art should be uploaded to Commons unless it is determined to be protected under Saudi Arabian copyright law, in which case it should be uploaded locally on Wikipedia as {{ PD-USonly}}. JohnCWiesenthal ( talk) 16:36, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep The cover art used in an article about songs/albums should use the most representative version. See the case of Carnival (Kanye West and Ty Dolla Sign song), where the image used in streaming services is used as the article infobox's main image, despite the existence of a free alternative. ‍ PSA 🏕️ ( talk) 11:39, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:Eugen Mack Free (Floor) Exercise.png

Unused file Sangjinhwa ( talk) 18:17, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

April 23

File:Huntertown IN seal.jpg

Dubious own-work claim. It's unclear if this seal is old enough to qualify for PD status. ✗ plicit 05:08, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

File:Get Ready For This - 2 Unlimited.ogg

De-PRODding rationale was this: Music sample should NOT be deleted as it is necessary to understand the article. Unfortunately, necessity rationale doesn't absolve the sample's potential failure to prove why omitting the sample harms the understanding of the whole song, the omission one part of WP:NFCC#8. The song was initially a composition, but then lyrics were added in another recording.

The whole sample is just music with one spoken line, and its role is the same as what free text already does: drive readers into seeking and then listening (versions of) the whole song. Furthermore, it doesn't fully represent (what) the whole song/composition (is about) and (how) the whole song/composition (had been done). George Ho ( talk) 05:24, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep - The brief clip is shorter than most fair use audio commonly featured on Wikipedia, and I would argue is fairly representative of the entire song. The lorax ( talk) 04:13, 20 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Length of the sample isn't the main issue. The riff heard in the sample doesn't provide enough context about the entire song unless reliable sources prove its significance. So far, I haven't found sources substantially covering the riff and its significance to the song. George Ho ( talk) 06:55, 20 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:17, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Footer

Today is April 23 2024. Put new nominations in Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2024 April 23 – ( 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 "===April 23===" 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 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