Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2025 June 17

June 17

File:CurseofPeladon IceLord.jpg

Purely decorative within the article, serving no identification purpose within its context. Should be deleted. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 03:57, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails WP:NFCC#8. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:44, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete concur with nom. Buffs (talk) 23:22, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pataudi trophy.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: speedy keep. The nominator withdrew and no one in the discussion has supported anything other than keeping. (non-admin closure) —Alalch E. 02:30, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Former trophy, and not the trophy of the article Tendulkar–Anderson Trophy (as the article has been renamed for the new trophy that will unveiled soon), and so fails WP:NFCC#8. Only appropriate non-free trophy image would be the new Tendulkar–Anderson Trophy once released (sources confirm it will be a new trophy: [1], [2])- until that time, no non-free trophy image meets all the NFCC. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:26, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for now. I see no reason to remove it as it is the current trophy. Buffs (talk) 23:23, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No it isn't- it's the former trophy that's about to be replaced. And it is not the subject of the article anymore, and so no longer meets all of the WP:NFCC. Joseph2302 (talk) 07:48, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's still the subject of the article. The silverware is not the trophy ("The map is not the territory"). The trophy, as an immaterial sports institution, the award, transcends any of its material instantiations (could be literally any physical object), and the change of name does not change its essence or sever its continuity either. We just need to caption the image "The old silverware, while the trophy was named Pataudi Trophy". That is how the article is currently written as well. —Alalch E. 16:24, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"About to be replaced" is the key phrase...it hasn't yet been replaced. Buffs (talk) 16:45, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Even when the silverware gets replaced, it's still going to be the same article subject. —Alalch E. 16:47, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's two different trophies. However, the fact that they're being treated as 2 distinct trophies with 2 separate articles means it is now sensible to keep at the newly renamed Pataudi Trophy article. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:24, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Withdraw I would like to withdraw this FFD. When I nominated this, there was one article about both the Pataudi Trophy and Anderson–Tendulkar Trophy, named 'Anderson–Tendulkar Trophy'- and so this deletion request was valid. However, as the articles have been split, it is acceptable and correct to have this image on the article about the legacy Pataudi Trophy. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:24, 19 June 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:Sssniperwolf Instagram story.jpg

Non-free use image not used in any article. —Alalch E. 16:12, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete While it's not used, it had a place in an article until ~14 hours prior to this submission. BUT it can be also replaced with text and fails NFCC. I find it unseemly to remove a file/image from an article and then nominate it for deletion without mentioning it was just removed earlier todayq. Buffs (talk) 23:32, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't remove it and am not obligated to study the article history. I took a brief look at article history and found nothing odd. There's nothing "unseemly" in my nomination. —Alalch E. 00:19, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I find that to be a little disingenuous. Just 3 minutes before this nomination, you undid several changes and were clearly looking at the article history based on your edit summary. Now, I never claimed you were the one who removed it, but to claim you had no idea where it originated or where it's history was seems to be quite a stretch. Buffs (talk) 04:32, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You said: ... without mentioning it was just removed earlier today. It isn't about my knowing where it originated or where it's history was, it's about my knowing the moment when it was removed from the article. It's an article I had edited before and have been returning to sporadically. I knew that the image used to be in it and saw that it is gone. I opened some random old revision from a list of 500 revisions expecting the file's name to be in it, and it was; I copied it and opened the file, took a look at it, saw that it's a non-free image, thought for a second whether to add it back, decided not to, and nominated it for deletion. During this, I had no idea that the file had been removed so recently. I was never searching for the revision in which the file was removed. So no: Nothing unseemly, not a stretch, nothing disingenuous. —Alalch E. 09:19, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Buffs 1timeuse75 (talk) 08:53, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:NFCC#1 as replaceable with just the text written out in a quote, and also fails WP:NFCC#8 as having an image of the post does not significantly improve the article (again, because the text written as a quote in the article is just as good). Joseph2302 (talk) 09:11, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]