Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2026 February 22

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. Whpq (talk) 22:52, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Anders Lassen 1920-1945.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jim Sweeney (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

A free alternative has been found and added to the article. Ixfd64 (talk) 04:55, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

Comment You also need to substantiate US public domain status on the free alternative. Do you have proof of publication in the United States? Based5290 :3 (talk) 22:20, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Delete: @Based5290: I have looked into the file myself and it turns out to be a mislabeled crop of File:The Special Boat Squadron (sbs) in the Aegean and Dodecanese during the Second World War HU71361.jpg, which is confirmed to be public domain in UK and US. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 12:58, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for finding this. Pretty mehh as a replacement, but its a free replacement nonetheless. Delete. Based5290 :3 (talk) 21:38, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Keep: PD status of the replacement needs to be substantiated. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 00:38, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

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.

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 as F5 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:01, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Alpharad YouTube icon.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by ConeKota (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Fails fair use rationale; this image is replaceable as we have a free photo of the YouTuber in question and it is not necessary to use a logo in its place. ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk) 16:38, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

Comment: The logo was used instead of the free photos uploaded years ago because the subject, Alpharad, explicitly stated he doesn't want the photo used on his article. ConeKota (talk) 19:12, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

Unless we can get VRT licensing of the logo, that doesn't seem to be a valid rationale. JayCubby 13:13, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

@JayCubby: There is also precedent in the article on CGP Grey, where we have free photos on Commons of him IRL but he has personally reached out and asked them not to be publicized on Wikipedia. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 20:47, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

In the case of CGP Grey, his face is never shown in videos, so the logo is a good representation of him, the YouTuber. In the case of Alpharad, though, they routinely stream with facecam, so a picture of them is the best representation of them, and a logo is unnecessary.

I'm also not sure why we are letting the subject of this article dictate its content to this degree. While I understand striking unflattering, poor quality, or pre-transition photos, the 2020 photo is Alpharad at a public event doing normal stuff and would be perfectly acceptable on any other page. If Alpharad does have significant issues with the photo, they are free to upload another more recent photo. Based5290 :3 (talk) 22:17, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Does right of publicity apply here if the subject specifically requests a particular photo not be shown? ―Howard • 🌽³³ 12:01, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

In this case, editorial use of a photo of a person at a public event doing normal things would be at least legally permissible, and I'd say morally too. How, this is ultimately irrelevant to whether this fair use image can be replaced. Unless Alpharad rejects photos of them being taken entirely, this image can obviously be replaced, possibly by Alpharad themselves. Based5290 :3 (talk) 17:46, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Well, if it's any help I did find a second photo of them, but from 2017: File:Alpharad in 2017.png. In this one they're looking into the camera at least. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 00:02, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

@ArtemisiaGentileschiFan: I should probably tell that this is the same case with the article on Videogamedunkey, but his channel's photo isn't used in the infobox in that case. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 20:46, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

• Delete - The logo is replaceable with a free photo of the subject for the purposes of visual identification. It is irrelevant what the subject want in this case as what they want is contrary to Wikipedia policy (WP:NFCC). If they want the logo on the Wikipedia article, then they need to release it under an acceptable free license. -- Whpq (talk) 14:58, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

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.

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. Whpq (talk) 14:59, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Hayakaken obverse.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Kzaral (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

The existing free logo File:Hayakaken logo.svg is sufficient for identifying the Hayakaken system. While the card pattern and the logo may visually differ, WP:NFCC requires "minimal usage" rather than an exhaustive display of every visual design variation. Since the identification purpose is already fulfilled by the free logo, and the specific design features of the card can be adequately conveyed through text, this non-free image constitutes redundant decoration. Its absence does not impair the reader's understanding of the article's topic; therefore, it fails WP:NFCC#1 and WP:NFCC#8. Wcam (talk) 22:25, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

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.