Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2025 March 9

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: Transfer to Commons. As having a realistic educational value separate from File:Southern California counties in red noshade.png. Ajpolino (talk) 04:22, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Socalcntyhighlighted.JPG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by House1090 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Orphaned, superseded by File:Southern California counties in red noshade.png. ✗plicit 00:44, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, redundant to Commons file. Salavat (talk) 04:25, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, original file. House1090 (talk) 15:22, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:06, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Transfer to Commons - No English wikipedia articles currently use this file. Many articles on other language Wikipedias use the other file. It seems like this is a lower quality graphic, compared to File:Southern California counties in red noshade.png, which displays the same information. This file does not violate any of the criteria at WP:NFCC. There's not much in WP:IMAGEPOL to govern whether this file should be deleted or not, except in Wikipedia:Image use policy#Deleting images: Wikipedia:Files for discussion "may be used for images that are low quality, obsolete, unencyclopedic, likely to remain unused, or whose use under the non-free content rules is disputed" (emphasis is mine). Since it was published under a free license, it can be transferred to Wikimedia Commons if it is useful. Transferring the image to Commons seems to be the best action, per policy, for this file. - tucoxn\^talk 11:52, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Transfer to commons I mean, it's useful, even if it's not the best image. Under current criteria, Tucoxn is correct. Buffs (talk) 04:01, 31 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.

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, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Paycom logo 2025.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Dvash788 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Lower quality and redundant to File:Paycom updated 2025.png (ineligible for speedy deletion due to a different background) Magog the Ogre (t • c) 17:02, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete redundant Tenpop421 (talk) 20:08, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 09:41, 12 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.