Wikipedia:Picture of the day/Unused

This is a page of featured pictures that have been skipped from appearing as picture of the day for various reasons. Some of these are mainly blocked by their articles or usage (for example, a very short article, or insufficient context), whereas others have more fundamental problems and will probably never appear on the main page. This is not a policy page or archive of discussions; with the exception of the first category, things may be removed from here without any further discussion. Note that some headings may be empty at any particular time. This is fine, it's better to have a framework for new images to be added to than to lack that framework.

Pictures added to this page should also be manually added to Category:Picture of the day/Unused.

For pictures that have not appeared yet, see Category:Featured pictures that have not appeared on the Main Page.

Least likely to appear

Major problems or cases where we simply did not act in a timely enough manner, and Wikipedia has moved on from the images too much. Largely a mixture of "We can't put that on the main page!" and "...Should this still be a featured picture?"

Could cause harm

THESE MUST NOT APPEAR WITHOUT FURTHER DISCUSSION

Image	Article	Reason
	Lynching	Voted against appearing in a discussion May 2022. Undocumented image with photographic decisions that lessen the victim's humanity, e.g. the hat put over the face. We don't know who or where this is, making this of very low value to historians. Also, it's on MediaWiki:Bad image list, which means we should be extra careful as we know that this image (or ones like it) have been used disruptively.
	Hermaphrodite (Nadar)	Voted against appearing in a discussion May 2022. Risk of harm to intersex people due to it being too clinical, too potentially exploitative, too likely to cause people to object to the nudity then jump straight to attacking intersex people if not properly contextualised. Nominator and restorer of the image requests it not appear.
	September Morn	Voted against appearing per discussion at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/September Morn. A mixture of issues with article's creator and issues with the painting's model being under eighteen.

Licensing issues

Non-free material must not appear on the main page. As such, anything with unclear status cannot appear.

Image	Article	Reason
	Me at the Zoo	See Talk:Me at the zoo, including the DYK nomination. From the discussions there, there's significant doubt that this is legitimately released under a Creative Commons licence. It was briefly designated as such on YouTube in around 2013, but we believe that the copyright holder is Yakov Lapitsky (who filmed the video) rather than its subject, Jawed Karim, who released it on YouTube. Absent some indication from Lapitsky that he released the rights to Karim, we cannot be certain that he authorised its publication. This has not (yet) been deleted from Commons, but under the precautionary principle we should not feature it on Wikipedia's main page.
	Virtual reality	The file has a tag on it, indicating that its date is dubious. This discrepancy seems to render the whole image dubious from a licensing standpoint, if we don't have the full information on it. Suggest holding off on the precautionary principle for now, until it is resolved.

Probably not actually a featured picture anymore

Images with no significant usage, and unlikely to gain any, or just really bad quality. These should probably be delisted.

Image	Article	Reason
	Cosmic Microwave Background	We used to block images from the main page if a different variant had appeared (in this case, File:WMAP 2008.png). We haven't for years at time of writing this, but it's a bit too late to put it on the main page: It's now only used as an infobox icon and has no substantial usage.

Image doesn't render well on the main page

Images with no significant usage, and unlikely to gain any, or just really bad quality. These should probably be delisted.

Image	Article	Reason
	Social flycatcher	Large PNG file which looks blurred when scaled down

Ones primarily blocked by articles

There's nothing inherently wrong with these images, but their articles are either too short or too problematic to put on the main page. If someone was willing to put in the work, most of these are potentially main page worthy.

Image	Article	Reason
	Art and engraving on United States banknotes	Kind of hard to make anything out of a single entry in a list. Could maybe run it alongside File:US-Fractional (5th Issue)-$0.10-Fr.1265.jpg?
	Vienna Diptych	Article way too short.
	Hippasa	Article consists of one sentence and a list, and the image is one species in the genus.
	Half union (in theory)	Not used.
	Fuscous honeyeater	Article way too short, and the most relevant text is uncited.
	Wonga pigeon	Article basically uncited.
	Nanpu Bridge	Article is an uncited stub
	Python brongersmai	Might be okay to run this, but article stops being cited half-way through.
	Marburger Schloss	article a stub
	Yellow-billed cardinal	article is a stub
	Yellow-billed cardinal Paroaria	both articles are stubs
	Le Boulevard de Montmartre, Matinée de Printemps	article is a stub
	Peucetia	article is a stub
	Château de Luynes	article is a stub
	Hortus Haren	both this and the other article, moon gate, are stubs
	Dichroic prism	article is entirely uncited, and also not entirely clear what the picture is, per Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Science/2023 January 30
	Ferrocarril de Antofagasta a Bolivia	no usable cited material in the article
	Portrait of Adeline Ravoux	no usable cited material really pertaining to the painting
	Hemimorphite	no inline cites
	Aeshna affinis	no inline cites
	Lavender waxbill	Stub, and not well referenced
		Not currently in any article, and doubt about which turtle it is
	Nassau grouper	Not enough usable cited material in the article
	Black-fronted dotterel	No inline cites
	St. Gilgen	Article largely uncited
	Desert rose (crystal)	Article largely cited to unreliable sources
	Northern_masked_weaver	Article a short stub and largely uncited
	Silver-washed fritillary	Article largely uncited
	Brilliant emerald	Article is a stub and not enough usable material in it
	Kentish glory	Article largely uncited
	Libythea celtis	Article stubby, and not certain how much is cited
	Cucullia lucifuga	Article is a stub without any inline citations
	Saturnia pavonia	Article is a stub without any inline citations
	Mercury switch	Article doesn't have enough cited usable material
	Chalarodon madagascariensis	Both Chalarodon madagascariensis and Chalarodon are poorly referenced stubs
	Rusty-margined flycatcher	Other than a detailed taxonomy, article has no other cited content
	David with the Head of Goliath (Caravaggio, Vienna)	not sufficiently referenced to write a blurb
	Lion of Babylon	very short stub with almost no refs
	Kungur Ice Cave	almost no refs
	Lycaena phlaeas	no inline refs
	Wu Yong	no inline refs
	Landscape with the Good Samaritan	no inline refs
	Spur-winged lapwing	most sections unreferenced and not enough material to generate meaningful blurb
	Chesterton Windmill	mostly unreferenced
	River tern	no inline refs
	Sella group	no inline refs
	Small red damselfly	no inline refs
	Small red damselfly	no inline refs
	Batalha Monastery	no inline refs
	Melitaea phoebe	article needs a major copyedit, not in a coherent enough state to construct a blurb right now
	Common darter	no inline cites
	Ringlet	no inline cites
	Charleston in the American Civil War	not really enough cited material to form a sensible blurb
	Santa Maria delle Grazie, Brescia	no inline cites
	Roma (opera)	no inline cites
	White-faced storm petrel	only the disease section has inline cites, and that's not enough to construct a blurb
	Graphosoma italicum	only the taxonomy section has inline cites, and that's not enough to construct a blurb
	Katabatic wind	neither the article nor the image caption sufficiently cited to construct a blurb
	Porta Nigra	not enough cited material to construct a blurb
	Black bittern	not enough cited material to construct a blurb
	Château de Saint-Ulrich	not enough cited material to construct a blurb
	Foden Trucks	not enough cited material to construct a blurb
	Famiclone	not enough cited material to construct a blurb
	Small skipper	no inline cites
	Opaon varicolor	Article is a stub.
	Paramo ground tyrant	Article is a stub.
	Juncus compressus	Article is a stub.
	NGC 2014, NGC 2020	Both articles are stubs.
	Yeongjo of Joseon	not enough cited material to construct a blurb (earlier unreferenced blurb can be found at Talk:Yeongjo of Joseon/POTD)
	Banz Abbey	no inline citations
	Asilidae	article is largely unsourced
	Point Arena Light	article is largerly unsourced
	Yellow-bellied flyrobin	only taxonomy section is sourced, other sections are not
	Large yellow underwing	article is largely unsourced
	Coenonympha glycerion	not enough usable prose
	Argynnis pandora	not enough usable prose
	Juma Mosque, Shamakhi	not enough cited prose
	Hermann Castle	article entirely uncited
	Kyelang	no significant aspects of the topic are cited
	Vanemuine	article largely unsourced
	Hope (whale)	article has general list of references but no inline citations
	Eriogaster arbusculae	article has no inline citations
	Nelson's sparrow	little more than a stub, and not enough cited material
	Biological membrane?	Unclear which article I should be linking this to. There were many articles listed at the FPC nomination, but none of them seem to cover the contents of the image in its totality. For example, the first article listed on the FPC - Biological membrane - does not mention "micelles" anywhere, despite those being part of this image.
	Naria poraria	Not enough cited material to form a blurb
	Mandelbulb	Heavily unsourced
	Pycnocline	Whatever the phenomenon shown in the picture is, involving jellyfish, the article prose doesn't seem to mention it (and also no sourcing in the image caption). The biology section only discusses plankton.
	Gustave III (Auber) or Pierre-Luc-Charles Cicéri	The Gustave III article doesn't have enough cited information or even information to construct a blurb. Heavily unsourced in artist article.
	Great Sphinx of Tanis	Not enough sourced information
	Abbey of the Dormition	Article largely unsourced
	Synesthesia in art, Giuseppe Arcimboldo	One article uses a deprecated sourcing style and one is largely unsourced. Sources exist and could be made into a separate article.
	Bastei	Article lacks inline citations
	Yıldız Hamidiye Mosque	Mostly uncited
	Northrop HL-10	Article has copyvio issues
	Alicudi	Not enough cited material to construct a blurb
	National Maps of Switzerland	Article largely uncited
	Pepper No. 30	Although the blurb now at Talk:Pepper No. 30/POTD has some material, it also contains a {{citation needed}} tag, not to mention that the first part about illumination is uncited, and the part about the aperture is hazy even in the article. Overall I don't see sufficient cited material for this to run at present
	Jules Barbier	stub article
	Jorge Amado	most of the article is uncited, and those bits that are cited aren't relevant enough to construct a blurb from
	Woodbury Langdon	lacking inline citations
	Hemiolaus cobaltina	article is a stub
	Leptomyrina phidias	article is a stub
	Cymothoe fumana	article is a stub
	Hemiolaus cobaltina	very short stub
	Leptomyrina phidias Leptomyrina	both very short stubs
	Zygaena lonicerae	stub with no inline citations
	Catasticta	very short stub
	Appias olferna
	Saint John Church of Sohrol	very short stub
	Thangka / Vairocanābhisaṃbodhi Sūtra	I would expect an article disussing either the artwork shown or the person depicted within it, but neither of the articles in which this appears are that; difficult to write a meaningful blurb
	Eurema blanda	aside from a block of text copied from an ancient book it's basically a sparsely cited stub
	Brenthis ino	article is stubby, and not enough cited material
	(no article)	no article dedicated to this photograph, it only appears at the photographer's page, Rudolf Koppitz and at List of photographs considered the most important
	(no article)	no article dedicated to this photograph, it only appears at the photographer's page, Matuschka and at List of photographs considered the most important
	(no article)	no article dedicated to this triptych, it only appears at the artist's page, Kazimierz Sichulski and at Art Nouveau
	Hohenschwangau Castle	almost no references in the article
	Perugia Cathedral	almost no references in the article
	Palla ussheri	stub
	Neurothemis fluctuans	stub
	Cymothoe fumana	stub
	Spectacled weaver	stub
	Phugtal Monastery	not enough cited material in article to construct a blurb
	Jenneria pustulata	not enough cited material in article to construct a blurb
	Slaty brushfinch	stub
	Rhytidochrota risaraldae	stub
	Gallotia galloti	not enough cited material in article to construct a blurb
	Aglaoctenus	stub
	Pyrops candelaria	not enough cited material in article to construct a blurb
	Kikau	unsourced stub

Doubts as to whether this is the preferred version

Images that may or may not have some usage, but have another version of some prominence that should probably be talked about before we put this on the main page.

Image	Article	Reason
	Theoretically Wheatfield with Crows	Replaced in Wheatfield with Crows by File:Vincent Van Gogh - Wheatfield with Crows.jpg
	Theoretically Gibson's albatross	Doesn't appear in Gibson's albatross and doesn't exactly look like the birds pictured there. It is in Great albatross but not certain what exactly it is

Holding areas

These images may be about to leave POTD/Unused, by one means or another. Things are unlikely to stay in these categories all that long, so they might be empty at any one time, but should be kept around to encourage proper classification.

Under discussion

These images are temporarily being delayed to allow a discussion or delist vote to take place.

Image	Article	Reason

Potentially ready for Main Page?

Images held back at one point, but which might be fine now. If they are obviously fine, just remove Category:Picture of the day/Unused from the image, and it should be scheduled shortly (possibly by you).

Image	Article	Reason