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) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:03, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Anucha Sri Image.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by AnuchaSri (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Out of the project scope. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 02:43, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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: keep in Haitian Football Federation, remove all other instances. — ξ^xplicit 02:14, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Federation Haitienne de Football.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by IncredibleSE (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Another leftover from non-free content review. Again, a non-free image probably used on too many pages. See original discussion at Wikipedia:Non-free content review/Archive 71#File:Federation Haitienne de Football.png Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:53, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Paging @Marchjuly: Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:55, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Suggest keep in Haitian Football Federation and remove from Haiti national football team, Haiti women's national football team, Haiti national futsal team, Haiti national under-23 football team, Haiti national under-20 football team, Haiti national under-17 football team, Haiti women's national under-23 football team, Haiti women's national under-20 football team, Haiti women's national under-17 football team for same reasons given in the above-linked NFCR thread. Nothing has changed since this was first brought up for discussion and I still think that the usages in all of the individual team articles fails No. 17 of WP:NFC#UUI. This has been the consensus reached in similar discussion such as Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2015 November 9#File:Asociación del Fútbol Argentino (crest).svg, Wikipedia:Non-free content review/Archive 69#File:Croatia football federation.png, Wikipedia:Non-free content review/Archive 55#File:Bhutan FA.png, Wikipedia:Non-free content review/Archive 56#File:Confederação Brasileira de Futebol (escudo).svg to name just a few and I don't see how this particular usage is any different than those. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:31, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree with Marchjuly above: keep in Haitian Football Federation, remove from the others. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 13:48, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:03, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:HornetsPrg112666Rochester.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by SportsMaster (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Three images used on the same article that likely don't comply with our non-free content criteria. This is a leftover from the defunct non-free content review and that original discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Non-free content review/Archive 71#File:HornetsPrg112666Rochester.jpg, File:Hornets 55.jpg and File:1939-40hornetspostcard.jpg Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:59, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:03, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dodge City Law.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by NostalgiaBuff97501 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

decorative non-free image used simply to show the former logo. Usage fails WP:NFCC#8 Peripitus (Talk) 07:39, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:03, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Subhajit Mondal.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Subhajit(magician) (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Unnecessary: portrait of uploader, who has so far made no useful contributions to the encyclopedia. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 10:11, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:03, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Having a Rave Up Canadian album cover.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Ojorojo (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

While it is generally held that a single non-free album cover is acceptable in an article about an album, this does not extend to second covers. There is no evidence that this particular cover is significant, and even the release itself is only mentioned in passing. Josh Milburn (talk) 12:53, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

At one point, it was planned to use this in the "Alternate cover" field in the infobox (consistent with Template:Infobox album#Advanced usage). However, that overloaded the infobox. I'm not sure moving it to another section is using it much differently, but if that is the policy, so be it. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:55, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:03, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Tiny orphaned image (just thirty thousand pixels), and I don't imagine this getting used any time soon; it's so small that it really wouldn't work at Rosemount, Ohio, for example. Nyttend (talk) 14:35, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.