Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2025 February 25

< Wikipedia:Files for discussion
< February 24
February 26 >

February 25

edit

File:Rosé - Gone (music video screenshot).png

edit
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: keep. (non-admin closure) it's lio! | talk | work 08:00, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rosé - Gone (music video screenshot).png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by MotherofSnakes (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Non-free media not explained or justified. The omission of the image would not harm a reader's understanding of the topic and therefore it fails WP:NFCC. The imagery in the picture is not subject to critical commentary. >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 00:05, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep I find myself surprised by my own !vote/comment. Usually this sort of this thing is completely superfluous and has no references...but I was pleasantly surprised with 4 sources and paragraphs describing the scene(s) in question from the music video. I find the nominator's comments to be either intentionally misleading or copy-pasted from elsewhere without regard for content. There is significant critical commentary on the music video, NF media is both explained and justified, and it enhances the reader's understanding of the topic. Buffs (talk) 16:23, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The image enhances the reader's understanding of the topic and is relevant to the commentary provided in the article about the video. Flabshoe1 (talk) 17:42, 25 February 2025 (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:Bulacan State University Student Lounge8.jpg

edit
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: no consensus. ✗plicit 10:32, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bulacan State University Student Lounge8.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by IronGargoyle (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

File of a sockpuppet of Florentino Floro under "Valenzuela400 (talk · contribs)" username, but there has been a community consensus to nuke all of his local uploads on enwiki, to not condone his acts of evading blocks on Commons. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive368#Another chapter in the never-ending saga of Florentino Floro. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 00:11, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. I discussed this with the deleting admin, who admitted that the deletions were not on the merits and did not object to my re-importation of the files from Commons (as opposed to undeletion). Files were all in use at some point and many still are. The files were validly released with a CC-BY-SA-4.0 license and so they are free to use by anyone. The only reason why they are not being hosted on Commons still is because they violated local freedom of panorama in the Philippines, but they are free to use on English Wikipedia via {{FoP-USonly}}. The nominator has repeatedly nominated files I have been importing from Commons for deletion (see my talk page and archives) and almost none of those nominated files have been deleted. This is making me feel like I'm being hounded. IronGargoyle (talk) 00:51, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @IronGargoyle to clear some things up:
    • the files from Commons are still the properties of Judge Floro sock, regardless of whoever made the imports. Right now, I have opened the discussion on Valenzuela400 sock's files on c:COM:AN to propose a similar move to nuke all of Valenzuela400's remaining uploads on Commons. IMO, all files found on enwiki under Valenzuela400 authorship need to be nuked, per logic of that discussion. Re: inuse files, even some inuse files were included in the deletion, like one that was used in Quezon City article.
    • I need to look out for your local imports of PH buildings so that I can collect all local uploads at my userspace page (User:JWilz12345/PHL photos FoP). I created this userspace page so that I can easily facilitate the transfer of several files to Commons in the event FoP becomes introduced here, as well as tagging files with (soon-to-be) undeleted Commons versions with NowCommons tags. This was already my practice since around late 2020, during the time PH copyright authorities here were considering for FoP to be inserted in our copyright law. As seen in meta:Pilipinas Panorama Community/Freedom of Panorama/Progress, we still have some hopes to have FoP introduced here, despite challenges from a Congress which seems to ignore legislative bills containing FoP. Having a userspace page ensures easier way to facilitate files which should be moved or which whose Commons copies should be restored instead of moving local copy. Enwiki does not have a convenient way to track or sort FoP deletions unlike Commons, which easily sorts deletions through categorizations; that made me felt the urge to create this userspace page of mine in late 2020.
    • Yeah, maybe some of the deletion requests I made to imports may have surprised you, but I am not acting in a rash manner; all of the discussions are based on questions on the applications of concepts like WP:NOTFILESTORAGE and the aforementioned discussion regarding Valenzuela400's photos. We all have different opinions and perspectives on these concepts. If the files ended up kept, then I'll add those files on my userspace page, which is simple. If I were a "rash user", then I would have nominated 50% of your uploads, which I didn't, considering the de facto WP:FOP practice. That's why I continue to add local imports to my userspace list, despite my dismay on our slow Congress of the Philippines. Our differing perspectives on concepts like those I mentioned above doesn't mean I am already acting like a rogue user.
    JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:01, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The timing of your nominations are just suspicious to me. For example, this earlier nomination came just hours after I turned down your request to help with your userspace project (I was actually helping until you started to nitpick my attempts to help). The present nomination came just hours after I called you out in the other FFD for removing a nominated file in favor of an image you favored instead. As for the rationale here, the logic of nuking in-use images just because they were originally created by a bad user doesn't hold water. I fully support blocking Judgefloro socks whenever they appear, because yeah, he adds a metric ton of crap, but there are some good images that he's uploaded too. There's no sense cutting off our nose to spite our face. That's why there is no automatic deletion of banned user contributions on Commons, and CSD G5 locally does not include cases where there are substantial contributions by another user. I would say that for a file, the fact that it was later uploaded by someone else (me) is a substantial contribution. It's not even Judgefloro's contribution any more really. It's my contribution of his freely-licensed image. What if he starts a Flickr? Would we not be allowed to bring in images from there because they were tainted in some way? Collateral damage should be avoided. IronGargoyle (talk) 02:33, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @IronGargoyle
    Regarding the earlier Philippine Arena image, it's all about our differences on which image must be retained and which may need to be removed because of quality issues. IMO, the arena image obscured by trees is already an issue on quality. BTW, the image was not kept as "kept", but as "no consensus" (in my perspective it's "soft keep" that doesn't favor either the side of the nominator or the defendant/s).
    Re: nitpicking, I don't see my reminder on adding some details to file entries (like names of original uploaders and links to Commons deletion requests) as "nitpicking". It is crucial that there is an instant link to deletion requests on Commons so that files can be revisited in the future in just 1 visit (no need to visit the local image description page and click the link shown by {{Deleted on Commons}} just to visit those Commons deletion requests). Somehow, my apology if you felt that way. I'm still firm on the need to add links to Commons deletion requests so there's immediate convenience in facilitating the file transfers/file speedy deletion (F8) tags in the future. I'm a type of user who tries to organize some things.
    Re: Judgefloro, no need. He already has a Flickr account (and possibly others like angel_of_death_photography), but I assume he may create another one since those Flickr accounts are already inactive for some time now. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:05, 25 February 2025 (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:Rancho Home of Original1.jpg

edit
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: no consensus. ✗plicit 10:32, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rancho Home of Original1.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by IronGargoyle (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

File of a sockpuppet of Florentino Floro under "Valenzuela400 (talk · contribs)" username, but there has been a community consensus to nuke all of his local uploads on enwiki, to not condone his acts of evading blocks on Commons. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive368#Another chapter in the never-ending saga of Florentino Floro. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 00:14, 25 February 2025 (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:Bulacan State University4.jpg

edit
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: no consensus. ✗plicit 10:32, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bulacan State University4.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by IronGargoyle (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

File of a sockpuppet of Florentino Floro under "Valenzuela400 (talk · contribs)" username, but there has been a community consensus to nuke all of his local uploads on enwiki, to not condone his acts of evading blocks on Commons. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive368#Another chapter in the never-ending saga of Florentino Floro. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 00:14, 25 February 2025 (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:Student Lounge Bulacan State University2.jpg

edit
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: no consensus. ✗plicit 10:32, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Student Lounge Bulacan State University2.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by IronGargoyle (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

File of a sockpuppet of Florentino Floro under "Valenzuela400 (talk · contribs)" username, but there has been a community consensus to nuke all of his local uploads on enwiki, to not condone his acts of evading blocks on Commons. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive368#Another chapter in the never-ending saga of Florentino Floro. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 00:15, 25 February 2025 (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:So Close To What, Digital Deluxe Album Art.jpeg

edit
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⚡ 12:06, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:So Close To What, Digital Deluxe Album Art.jpeg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Nickname27 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Per WP:NFCC#3a and 8, the inclusion of this artwork would not significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would not be detrimental to that understanding. livelikemusic (TALK!) 00:52, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. It is my understanding that deluxe album covers are not including, per the policy referenced by the nominator. estar8806 (talk) ★ 02:59, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It is currently the only cover available for digital editions which makes it more visible and therefore needed. Pandaboy3 (talk) 03:09, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but File:Tate McRae - So Close to What.png is the more widely sourced and recognized artwork, making it more vital to the understanding of the article. livelikemusic (TALK!) 04:14, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Now that she's changed all the digital editions to this version, technically its the 'official' version of the album. Having both would be beneficial in differentiating between the two as the original is still noticeable but no longer the 'official'. Maxwell Smart123321 04:24, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete For Now Retracting because the digital album has been changed back to the original. No point having it as its now only the version for the alternate cover (Official name: So Close To What Exclusive 18 Track Digital Download with Alt Cover). However, IF the use of so many alternate covers becomes a notable event (I doubt it; but if it does) and its recognised with notable sources, then I say add it back at a later date. Maxwell Smart123321 03:14, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep this album art is not technically the deluxe cover art and has replaced the original as it’s standard album art on all digital platforms, including social media. Whilst the photo is not currently widely regarded it will be used as the primary photo in reference to the album. Especially because if somebody is coming from social media trying to understand what the album is, they will see this version of the art opposed to its “standard” I.e. requiring visual confirmation they are on the correct page. Nickname27 (talk) 05:25, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Delete for now: Album art has been removed from digital platforms, however a footnote may be a good idea for additional understanding because it had a temporary impact on the promotion of the album. Nickname27 (talk) 21:08, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: this is the digital version as of Feb 25, 2025. The original cover now only exists physically. This is not a deluxe cover, and the section title has been updated to reflect 2600:1700:67A8:A810:ABB4:A742:62BC:AC84 (talk) 14:15, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: As the digital cover, it is going to be very recognized and vital to the understanding of the article. Flabshoe1 (talk) 14:47, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Delete: Retracting because the digital album cover has been changed back to the original.Flabshoe1 (talk) 19:11, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: The artwork was changed across all digital editions, including the standard edition. The original artwork is now only for (most) physical editions. It's more similar to the Miss Anthropocene situation, where two artworks are kept because both are standard, than to a traditional deluxe. Case in point: Miss Anthropocene has deluxe versions of both artworks that used to be included in that article but were removed per the deluxe policy. I firmly believe that both artworks need to be in the So Close to What article as well, since they are both standard now and the digital artwork is bound to gain prominence after the change. Removing it would decrease identifiability eventually. Bizarre BizarreTalk modern to me 16:29, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retracting; see my reply to nominator. Bizarre BizarreTalk modern to me 15:32, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, since the digital/streaming cover has now been reverted back to the original artwork. TenthAvenueFreezeOut (talk) 11:16, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is a revised version of the album cover and it should be retained. I don't think there should be any discussion. Kst daniel (talk) 01:32, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The rule has always been keep the deluxe cover art unless it is almost the exact same as the standard so... Screagle99 (talk) 22:10, 6 March 2025 (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:Logo of Wakulla County Florida in 2013.jpg

edit
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) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Logo of Wakulla County Florida in 2013.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Sphilbrick (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Florida government works belong to PD, including flags and seals. Fumikas Sagisavas (talk) 03:31, 25 February 2025 (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:Nancy Manter Stay Still.jpeg

edit
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 2025 March 7. ✗plicit 06:43, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nancy Manter Stay Still.jpeg (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:190823040949-kurt-cobain-sweater-restricted.webp

edit
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⚡ 02:01, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:190823040949-kurt-cobain-sweater-restricted.webp (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Ychc1n19 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Neither of these uses have a sufficient WP:NFCC.

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:2011 Hackleburg-Phil Campbell tornado impacting Hackleburg.png

edit
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 2025 March 5. ✗plicit 00:16, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:2011 Hackleburg-Phil Campbell tornado impacting Hackleburg.png (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:SpongeBob SquarePants character.svg

edit
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⚡ 02:01, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:SpongeBob SquarePants character.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by The Last Wikibender (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Replaceable with c:File:SpongeBob SquarePants character.png per WP:NFCC#1. JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 16:00, 25 February 2025 (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:Patrick Star.svg

edit
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⚡ 02:01, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Patrick Star.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by The Last Wikibender (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Replaceable with c:File:Patrick Star character.png per WP:NFCC#1. JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 16:07, 25 February 2025 (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:Mr. Krabs.svg

edit
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⚡ 02:01, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mr. Krabs.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by The Last Wikibender (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Replaceable with c:File:Mr Krabs character.png per WP:NFCC#1. JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 22:07, 25 February 2025 (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:Sandy Cheeks.svg

edit
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⚡ 02:01, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sandy Cheeks.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by The Last Wikibender (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Replaceable with c:File:Sandy Cheeks character.png per WP:NFCC#1. JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 22:13, 25 February 2025 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Files_for_discussion/2025_February_25&oldid=1280778913"