Files for discussion (FfD) is for listing images and other media files which may be unneeded or have either free content or non-free content usage concerns. Files that have been listed here for more than 7 days are eligible for either deletion or removal from pages if either a consensus to do so has been reached or the nominator specifically requests deletion or removal and no objections are raised. To quote the non-free content criteria, "it is the duty of users seeking to include or retain content to provide a valid rationale; those seeking to remove or delete it are not required to show that one cannot be created." For undeletion requests, first contact the administrator who deleted the file. If you are unable to resolve the issue with that administrator, the matter should be brought to deletion review. Examples of what files you may request for discussion, deletion or change here:
If you have questions if something should be deleted, consider asking at Media Copyright Questions. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
What not to list here
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Instructions for listing files for discussion Use Twinkle. If you can't, follow these steps to do manually:
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:
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. |
Deletion discussions |
---|
|
Articles |
Templates and modules |
Files |
Categories |
Redirects |
Miscellany |
Speedy deletion |
Proposed deletion |
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
The following discussions are more than 7 days old and are pending processing by an administrator:
June 11
File:Kenny Loggins - Danger Zone.ogg
- File:Kenny Loggins - Danger Zone.ogg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Popcornfud ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
De-PRODded sample is used in Danger Zone (Kenny Loggins song) and Yamaha DX7. If the song article is an adequate commentary to justify such usage, then... I would accept. However, I hear only 17 seconds of instrumental opening, so I wonder whether it helps readers understand the song as it is. Maybe it should belong in the article about the synthesizer used in the song. I'm unsure whether deleting the sample detriments the understanding of the song and/or the synthesizer. I default to favor deleting the sample from the whole project, but I can welcome rebuttals and other opinions. George Ho (talk) 22:36, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: I'm the editor who uploaded this file. I uploaded it as an example of a famous use of a famous synthesizer, the Yamaha DX7, for the Yamaha DX7 article. Specifically, the file demonstrates the use of the synthesizer's "BASS 1" preset, which is mentioned (and cited) in the prose of the article. I thought it would be helpful for readers to hear the synth in context.
- Legal stuff on Wikipedia is not my strong point, so I'll leave it up to other editors to decide whether this meets fair use criteria - I thought it did at the time I uploaded it, but I may well have been wrong. Cheers. Popcornfud (talk) 17:03, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep meets all criteria. Clearly applicable to Yamaha DX7. I think Danger Zone (Kenny Loggins song) too is a valid use for such an iconic song. Buffs (talk) 04:17, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Buffs and Popcornfud: I recently replaced the OGG file (one segment) with the MP3 one (another segment). George Ho (talk) 23:39, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep meets all criteria. Clearly applicable to Yamaha DX7. I think Danger Zone (Kenny Loggins song) too is a valid use for such an iconic song. Buffs (talk) 04:17, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:42, 11 June 2022 (UTC)- @George Ho: Pick one or the other. I don't particularly care which format. Buffs (talk) 04:34, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
June 9
- Milwaukee 148 ( | contribs | uploads | upload log). – uploaded by
The website from which this image is taken says it is a U.S. Navy photo. It might be worth investigating whether {{PD-USGov-Military-Navy}} applies. Ixfd64 (talk) 23:51, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Move to Commons per {{PD-USGov-Military-Navy}}. Yoshiman6464 ♫🥚 19:41, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
June 8
File:George-Shapiro-Friedman.jpg
- File:George-Shapiro-Friedman.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Janemansfield74 ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
see c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with george shapiro Magog the Ogre (t • c) 17:58, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, FASTILY 02:44, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
File:Northern Group of Forces.jpg
- File:Northern Group of Forces.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Piotrus ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
The file is an image showing Soviet officials inspecting soldiers from the Northern Group of Forces, in which the uploader only stated "to illustrate the military formation in question
" as the sole rationale.
However, the file provided no information on the formation and organization of the troops (for example, an order of battle made from openly-available sources are more useful in conveying such information.), and otherwise, the file functions as a replaceable graphic illustration to the article. It's therefore doubted whether the file's inclusion will significantly increase readers' understanding on the article. The file violates WP:NFCC#8, and should be deleted. 廣九直通車 (talk) 07:49, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. It illustrates the concept of soldiers, which is a different type of message than an order of battle infographic would be. It can only be replaced by a free image showing the troops. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:42, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Due to Russian copyright laws, it is almost impossible to find free images of Soviet troops during this period. This image is practically not replaceable by a free image for that reason. Kges1901 (talk) 17:19, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- OK, I misunderstood "formation" as "formation and organization of the group", but what makes images of Soviet soldiers in Poland important to the understanding towards the article? The image only highlights soldiers from the Northern Group. Without proper enquiry one won't even know they are from the Northern Group garrisoned in Poland (rather than some random Soviet soldiers).
- This case is somehow similar to a previous FFD request for the AP Tank Man image, in which it is decided that any other usage on June Fourth Incident-related pages (except the Tank Man page, which is central and irreplacable to the topic) are deleted for NFCC8. Both images are side-note illustrations to the topics described that are not central to the main topic (Tank Man in illustrating military actions and bloodshed in the June Fourth Incident, and this nominated image in illustrating the Northern Group in general). Unless this nominated image is itself a topic described in its article (clearly not this case), or used to illustrate a historical moment, then I consider the file did fail the requirement of NFCC8.廣九直通車 (talk) 11:48, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep clearly encyclopedic and serves to illustrate the subject at hand. I see no valid reason for deletion listed here. Buffs (talk) 04:03, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Refute As another related example, please consider this file deleted by a FFD request, which is an image depicting the moment when the Hong Kong Garrison entered Hong Kong. From the "keep" position, the image is certainly encyclopedic and illustrates the subject well, but is nevertheless agreed by the deleting administrator as an addition instead of a crucial part to the article it was used (so NFCC8 is violated).廣九直通車 (talk) 13:14, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- So the deleting admin made a mistake. Let's not repeat it. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:14, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Refute As another related example, please consider this file deleted by a FFD request, which is an image depicting the moment when the Hong Kong Garrison entered Hong Kong. From the "keep" position, the image is certainly encyclopedic and illustrates the subject well, but is nevertheless agreed by the deleting administrator as an addition instead of a crucial part to the article it was used (so NFCC8 is violated).廣九直通車 (talk) 13:14, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, FASTILY 02:44, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - The removal of this image does not detract from a reader's understanding of the article. As used, this doe not meet with WP:NFCC#8. -- Whpq (talk) 12:42, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
File:The Badge of PLANS Shandong 17.jpg
- File:The Badge of PLANS Shandong 17.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by 竹叶狂想曲 ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Fails WP:NFCC#1 as a free image exists that serves as a more direct means of visual identification to the article subject. No need to use a non-free symbol. Wcam (talk) 14:22, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment. Is the licensing of File:The Badge of PLANS Liaoning 16.png correct? If so, this file would seemingly be free as well. ✗plicit 00:57, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, FASTILY 02:44, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- That permission is wrong as well. Unlike US copyright law, Chinese copyright law only mandates that government edicts that have executive, legislative or judicial nature are in their local public domain. I've seen enough files blatantly misusing PD-PRC-exempt on Commons.廣九直通車 (talk) 08:12, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- It's pretty obvious that both images are copyrighted. From a quick click around List of aircraft carriers, it seems that our general practice is to permit a non-free logo/patch/shield/whatever to be used, so keep. --B (talk) 18:30, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Except it isn't. From your given list, most of the ship badges are freely released, like the typical US federal government public domain for US carriers, or GJSTU for modern Japanese carriers. Some badges have wrongly applied permissions, like c:File:INS Viraat (R22) crest.jpg (Indian GODL doesn't allow free use of badges, crests, logos, etc.: c:Template:GODL-India). The only case where non-free ship badges are applied are the Royal Navy aircraft carriers. So I don't see such "general practice" you claimed.廣九直通車 (talk) 05:53, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- I wasn't looking at ones from the US (which are obviously all PD). Most of the logos are at Commons and probably not legitimately PD (should be deleted at Commons and considered for upload here). But you can see some fair use ones for non-US ships - HMS Queen Elizabeth (R08), HMS Ark Royal (R07), HMS Illustrious (R06), HMS Invincible (R05) --B (talk) 10:12, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Except it isn't. From your given list, most of the ship badges are freely released, like the typical US federal government public domain for US carriers, or GJSTU for modern Japanese carriers. Some badges have wrongly applied permissions, like c:File:INS Viraat (R22) crest.jpg (Indian GODL doesn't allow free use of badges, crests, logos, etc.: c:Template:GODL-India). The only case where non-free ship badges are applied are the Royal Navy aircraft carriers. So I don't see such "general practice" you claimed.廣九直通車 (talk) 05:53, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
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.
June 13
File:Site plan.jpg
- 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: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 13:10, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- File:Site plan.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jkhanfer ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
If this is own work, why would you upload it with a resolution in which the text is unreadable? — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 07:21, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 14:57, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: Provides nothing, you can't make out much from the image and has limited value while the licence is questionable at best. Terasail[✉️] 12:18, 14 June 2022 (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:RFC Second Lieutenant Karl Brooks Heisey 1920.jpg
- 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: Delete; deleted as F8 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 07:01, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- File:RFC Second Lieutenant Karl Brooks Heisey 1920.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Unionville ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
WP:NFGALLERY B (talk) 10:00, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- hi NFGallery this is photo taken in 1920 over 100 years ago in Canada this is a work to which no copyright applies as it was created before 1949. I understand I have to show compliance with US copyright laws which are different ( even though the photo is of a Canadian and taken in Canada with no connection to the USA) and imposed on the rest of the world by Wikipedia. The photo is used in a Wikipedia article on the subject Kark Brooks Heisey. This is the only picture of Heisey in uniform in existence that I am aware of and it is used in the Karl Brooks Heisey article which I believe constitutes fair use whatever that means. I dont understand the issue being raised here. Unionville (talk) 12:16, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- What more do you want?
- Media data and Non-free use rationale
- Description
- Photo of Karl Brooks Heisey World War 1 Royal Air Force Second Lieutenant taken 1920
- Author or
- copyright owner
- Not Known
- Source (WP:NFCC#4)
- Family photo inherited by descendant of Karl Brooks Heisey who posted photo on wikimedia
- Publication
- December 12, 2016 wikipedia
- Date of publication
- 1919-1920
- Use in article (WP:NFCC#7)
- Karl Brooks Heisey
- Purpose of use in article (WP:NFCC#8)
- illustrate subject of article in military uniform as part of article which concerns World War 1 service
- Not replaceable with
- free media because (WP:NFCC#1)
- not replaceable only known image of subject in military uniform contemporary to end of WW1 in existence
- Minimal use (WP:NFCC#3)
- yes head shot only portrait photo image cannot be reduced further and provide image of subject
- Respect for
- commercial opportunities (WP:NFCC#2)
- no commercial use or impac Unionville (talk) 12:24, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep, photograph would be in the public domain in both Canada and the United States per {{PD-Canada}}. The Non-free use rationale can be removed and the photo moved to Commons. Salavat (talk) 15:02, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- I dont know how to do that. Unionville (talk) 18:53, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep and restore 2016 revision as it's PD per {{PD-Canada}}. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 19:12, 13 June 2022 (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:ArchiCAD9Screenshot.jpg
- File:ArchiCAD9Screenshot.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Dom0803 ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Unused screenshot of non-free software. Could qualify for fair use if used on ArchiCAD. Ixfd64 (talk) 17:54, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Ixfd64, I added File:Archicad screenshot (floor plan).jpg to Archicad. If you think File:ArchiCAD9Screenshot.jpg is better I don't feel too strongly either way. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 20:31, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Recent nominations
June 14
File:Niche (Company) Logo.png
- File:Niche (Company) Logo.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by ExtremeWhistler ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Orphaned, superseded by vector version File:Niche logo.svg on Commons. ✗plicit 13:42, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
File:Sidhu Moose Wala 2k17.png
- File:Sidhu Moose Wala 2k17.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by WikiUser1211 ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Image is used purely decoratively in a list article. Fails WP:NFCC#8. Whpq (talk) 15:02, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
File:CDawgVA-YouTube.jpg
- File:CDawgVA-YouTube.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Washuotaku ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
This non-free image is being used for visual identification of CDawgVA, a youtuber. The Youtuber is a living person, and so an alternative identification, in the form of a photo can be made that is freely licensed, and so this usage fails WP:NFCC#1. The youtuber has multiple youtube channels. This image is only used as an identifying icon on one of the many channels. As such, it is not really identifying the person, but rather a specific youtube channel. This image is not the subject of significant sourced commentary, and so also fails WP:NFCC#8. Whpq (talk) 15:09, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep, The 2D image is representative of both the YouTuber and the brand, which the article is written as both. --WashuOtaku (talk) 15:52, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
File:Vectorartistscreenshot.png
- File:Vectorartistscreenshot.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Drschawrz ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Unused screenshot of non-free [1] software. Ixfd64 (talk) 22:28, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
June 15
File:Jupiter Island Estate.jpg
- File:Jupiter Island Estate.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Phoenixslayer100 ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Doubtful own work per uploader's talk. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 02:16, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - The uploader's history of copyright violations doesn't provide a lot of confidence that the claim of own work is true. The image was uploaded in 2011, but I found a video on Youtube from 2009 that uses the same image when showing off Celine Dion's home. See 1:51 mark of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqhbaJWh9iE fort he frame -- Whpq (talk) 02:34, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 15:04, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
File:Archbishop Ohrid mantle.jpg
- File:Archbishop Ohrid mantle.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jingiby ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
The source of the file is vague ("Source - National Historical Museum of Bulgaria."), and I found nothing about this allegedly historical drawing on the museum's website.
This unknown website reuses this image and its description verbatim, and gives a reference. However, said reference (I managed to find a scan only here) does not contain the image.
It is possible the image is an original, recent, copyrighted image, in the style of old paintings.
The image is currently unused.
Therefore, I think this image should be deleted. Veverve (talk) 08:22, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment - The description of the image above on the unknown website is in fact the book: Macedonia: documents and materials, published by the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences in 1978. A fragment of the restored mantel can be seen in this publication in the tabloid 24 Chasa, dedicated to the secret fund of the National Historical Museum. It falls into it, and thus is exposed very rarely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jingiby (talk • contribs)
- @Jingiby: Thank you for your input and details.
- Since you are its original uploader, is there any chance you remember where exactly you took this image from, years ago? Is it from Macedonia: documents and materials, or is the "unknown website" reusing the very image you uploaded?
- Is there a way you could upload a higher resolution version of the image? Frankly, I have no idea what's represented apart from 5 angels; if you told me it was a scene of the Resurrection of Jesus I would not be able to say it is not. To me, due to this, the image in any case is not very useful. Veverve (talk) 20:07, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hello Veverve. As far as I remember it was uploaded from the "unknown site". I have not looked for an image of the shroud with a better resolution and I don't know whether I can find such one. Otherwise, I don't have an idea which religious scene is depicted there. Jingiby (talk) 05:35, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
File:Mygrandfather1.jpg
- File:Mygrandfather1.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Shadowwarrior8 ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Misleading or false image (possibly fictional, name of the modern artist visible [2]) - Self published eulogy in a magazine. Prominent newspaper in Kerala refused to publish the unverified image here [3] (by the same author) - Mahmoodeu (talk) 11:35, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Source says [4] "unearthed a rare and perhaps the only photograph of Vakkom Moulavi" - the image uploaded is a painting, not a photograph!
Mahmoodeu (talk) 11:48, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
File:Virenque fan.jpg
- File:Virenque fan.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Autodidactyl ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
The poster likely isn't de minimis. Image is not used anywhere. Ixfd64 (talk) 21:20, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
June 16
File:Remix Award Logo 2.png
- File:Remix Award Logo 2.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by TimBello ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Dubious claim of own work as the logo could be found on another website prior to the upload to Wikipedia. [5] Image is not used anywhere. Ixfd64 (talk) 17:26, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
June 17
File:Nanhua.jpg
- File:Nanhua.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Shannon1 ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Fair use rationale: "No public domain images of this dam are known to exist." Any reason in particular nobody could go over there and take a picture? — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 08:37, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
File:PhilAnselmo1988.jpeg
- File:PhilAnselmo1988.jpeg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by ExcitiveStan3680 ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
This is a non-free image of a living person. If used purely for identification as stated, then it fails WP:NFCC#1, as the article on Phil Anselmo contains many freely licensed images already. There is a note in the minmal use field of the non-free usage rationale stating "It only represents Philip Anselmo during the Glam Metal era." The article does not provide any significant sourced critical commentary about Anselmo's Glam metal era look so it also fails WP:NFCC#8 if this is an alternative purpose. Whpq (talk) 18:15, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- this image should be kept imo as it shows Anselmo in his early days before his style drastically changed, so it would add a lot to the article --FMSky (talk) 18:38, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
File:MN StateParkMap.png
- File:MN StateParkMap.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Yanktonranger ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
I don't believe a map like this qualifies for fair use because we can easily make our own. Ixfd64 (talk) 21:36, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- The image certainly does not exceed the resolution standards for fair use; it is of such low resolution that it is illegible and essentially unusable. I agree that a clever person could make a suitable image (perhaps using the coordinates in the respective articles on the parks). But we need to find that person. Kablammo (talk) 12:33, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- There is an existing unlabeled image on List of Minnesota state parks; given the number of parks it would be difficult to add legible labels to any image usable in a wikipedia article. Kablammo (talk) 12:44, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - A free map is obviously possible so fails WP:NFCC#1. -- Whpq (talk) 12:37, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
June 18
File:Fastball band photo, 2022.jpg
- File:Fastball band photo, 2022.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Davidacegutierrez ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Tagged VRT received for 3 months. Upon reviewing the associated VRT ticket (VRT members only), I believe it is unlikely that permission will be confirmed. FASTILY 08:44, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
File:Tangla Town Map.png
- File:Tangla Town Map.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Hadadsa ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
I don't believe this map qualifies for fair use as we could easily embed OpenStreetMap. Ixfd64 (talk) 22:55, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
File:Witten Johanniskirche Rathausturm.jpg
- 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 (non-admin closure). The file is on Commons. Please nominate it for deletion there if you still feel it should be deleted. Salavat (talk) 04:03, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- File:Witten Johanniskirche Rathausturm.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jty ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
The picture of the townhall of Hattingen shows the townhall of a different town (its neighbouring town), Witten. Therefore it should be replaced. Sandra10mar (talk) 23:24, 18 June 2022 (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.
June 19
File:Zend Engine logo.png
- File:Zend Engine logo.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Ajfweb ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
This might not be eligible for copyright because it is only simple text. weeklyd3 (message me | my contributions) 03:06, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Relicense to pd-logo and copy to Commons. The developer is an American company so the TOO shouldn't be an issue. Salavat (talk) 04:10, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
File:SpongeBob SquarePants characters promo.png
- File:SpongeBob SquarePants characters promo.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by The Last Wikibender ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
I cannot see how this helps in readers' comprehension and visual understanding of the article SpongeBob SquarePants. The article is about the show and not the characters. There is already the list article, "List of SpongeBob SquarePants characters," featuring another (but better) fair use file File:Nickelodeon SpongeBob SquarePants Characters Cast.png. This fair use file in question fails WP:NFCCP, #8. Removal of this does not deprive Wikipedia; readers are expected to go to List of SpongeBob SquarePants characters if they want to see the characters. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 06:45, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
File:Christopher Dorner.jpg
- File:Christopher Dorner.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Canoe1967 ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
I found a photograph (direct link) of Dorner that could be used as a free alternative. It was published in the LAPD newsletter, in which case {{PD-CAGov}} would likely apply. Ixfd64 (talk) 19:49, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: I found a cropped version at USA Today (direct link) that has an even higher resolution. Ixfd64 (talk) 19:59, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
June 20
File:Binhai Mass Transit Line 9.png
- File:Binhai Mass Transit Line 9.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by ASDFGH ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Orphaned, superseded by File:TJM Line 9 icon.svg on Commons. ✗plicit 14:29, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
File:Madamexdeluxe.jpg
- File:Madamexdeluxe.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by SomeWhatLife ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Not notable for inclusion. This is used as an alternative cover for the deluxe edition of the album. It is not subject to extensive commentary which would warrant the addition of a second non-free cover in the article. It's omission is not detrimental to reader's understanding of the topic. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 19:56, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
File:Taipei-Win31.png
- File:Taipei-Win31.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Rich Smith ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Fails WP:NFCC#8: There's no sourced commentary in the article about the game Taipei, thus the omission of this screenshot would not be detrimental to reader's understanding of the article topic. Wcam (talk) 19:59, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
File:Habla Ahora Edicion Especial.jpg
- File:Habla Ahora Edicion Especial.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by CarpeDiemBelieve ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).
Inclusion of a second non-free cover adds nothing to reader's understanding of the topic and could be easily explained in words. It's omission is not detrimental to the understanding of the topic. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 19:59, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Today is June 20 2022. Put new nominations in Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2022 June 20 – ()
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 "===June 20===" 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.