Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2025 November 15

November 15

File:Eurythmics - Love Is A Stranger.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: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:05, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NFC#CS and WP:SAMPLE#CS, recently anchored in the target page (diff), were cited to de-PROD the sample. However, "WP:NFC#CS" says that usually one non-free file is enough. Right now, a cover art and a sample are both used, and I'm concerned the "number of items" may have exceeded minimality needed for compliance. Also, I'm still concerned that the song may be already understood without the sample, meaning it might not contextually signify the topic in question. George Ho (talk) 07:13, 15 November 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:FIFA World Rankings logo.svg

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 November 22. ✗plicit 14:07, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:FIFA World Rankings logo.svg (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:... Baby One More Time (International).png

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. ✗plicit 00:11, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The rationale for this image is false. It is a secondary image, not the main image at the top of the infobox. The rationale makes the false statement, "The image is placed in the infobox at the top of the article discussing the work, to show the primary visual image associated with the work". As a secondary non-free image, there should be a strong reason to include it, for instance article text talking about the artwork. This is absent from the page. Binksternet (talk) 14:23, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I included a new section in the article, titled Cover art. I wrote abouth both. See if it's enough to keep both album covers in the article. Markus WikiEditor (talk) 02:32, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's thin but it's better than nothing. Binksternet (talk) 05:53, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for now – A section about both cover arts has been added, so I figured that removing/deleting this "ethereal" cover art would deprive readers from learning how the album has been delivered variously, especially in the pre-digital/streaming era. George Ho (talk) 08:21, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as commentary has been added to the article prose and can be expanded over time with supplemental third-party sources. livelikemusic (TALK!) 17:13, 16 November 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:Duelweaver.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 ⚡ 02:01, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Currently used in ABC Movie of the Week, but the screenshot of an actor in a made-for-TV movie, even with a detailed caption, might not contextually signify the article subject (of discussion?). No longer used in the film article. George Ho (talk) 20:27, 15 November 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:Madonna - Confessions on a Dance Floor (Twenty Years Edition).png

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, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image fails per WP:NFCC#3a and 8. Its exclusion would not be detrimental to the understanding of Confessions on a Dancefloor. livelikemusic (TALK!) 21:34, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the album cover should stay on this page. It reflects a different available album cover do a re-release/anniversary edition of the album. Many albums on Wikipedia feature different/multiple album covers so this one shouldn’t be any different. ~2025-35256-85 (talk) 23:57, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – With all due to respect [to the other (anonymous) user], even the visually different cover art still doesn't contextually signify the whole (re-released) album. I'm unconvinced that omitting this reissue cover would impact much understanding about the album already illustrated and identified by the standard/original cover art. Also, the ""other stuff exists" argument doesn't hold much water. Sure, other articles might have used at least two covers arts, but such use still doesn't make the covers exempt from NFCC at all! George Ho (talk) 00:20, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not needed for understanding the topic. Binksternet (talk) 15:59, 22 November 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.