Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 July 22

< July 21	July 23 >

July 22

File:Middlewich - Pepper Street Salt Works.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

no evidence presented that would show copyright has expired, as claimed Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:06, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

this board posting, [1], says CD was from cheshire chronicle. why not initiate OTRS? btw, there are 4 others like this. Slowking4: 7@1|x 14:21, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:Man running around in box.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Go_for_it! (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log

).

Orphaned, not free bc cannot be sold per FAQ on source website Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:11, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:Nazi race map Koe.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, invalid reason to be public domain Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:14, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:Nordreichflag.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of a non-notable fictional place, the article about which

T/C) 00:25, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:IPKF fdc.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

invalid reason to be PD (indian govt images only become PD 60 years later per {{

WP:NFCC if nonfree Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:28, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:US-MN-Ro.JPG

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, no need to keep this wrinkly flag when we have svg image (File:Rochester-mn-flag.svg) - also probably a redundant nonfree image - licensing is questionable Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:31, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:Hasso von Boehmer.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, invalid rationale for being public domain Calliopejen1 (talk) 01:21, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:Ferdinand von Lüninck.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, invalid reason for being public domain Calliopejen1 (talk) 01:22, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:1992 Rapture.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fails

WP:NFCC#8 - the poster is used only decoratively in the article and is not the source of commentary. B (talk) 01:28, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete per nomination. NativeForeigner ^Talk/_Contribs 17:18, 24 July 2011 (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.

File:PD-India

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: Image does not exist. If the file name in the header contains a typo, feel free to correct the typo and un-close this discussion. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

does not fully satisfy {[tl - that is, it is PD in India but not in the US (as required by en.wiki)}} Calliopejen1 (talk) 01:29, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:The Kunar River,Nurgal district.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

confusing PD rationale - who is even the author of this image? Calliopejen1 (talk) 01:31, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It might be a good start to delete if you like.I am not interested in this case and there might appear people from that area and send you a lot of pictures-after all that is their homeland...Drjmarkov (talk) 04:50, 26 July 2011 (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.

File:PopeDioscorosI.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

sourced to a random wiki page that does not identify the copyright holder Calliopejen1 (talk) 01:35, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:Escut de L'Escala.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, superseded by File:Escut de l'Escala.svg Calliopejen1 (talk) 01:36, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:James Parks.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kumioko (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log

).

not a valid reason to be public domain, no real source or identification of copyright holder, so we shouldn't keep it if it's nonfree Calliopejen1 (talk) 01:38, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The image was taken before 1950 and therefore is public domain. --
talk) 10:31, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply
]

That is simply untrue. Many images taken before 1950 are copyrighted. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:29, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry your right I was thinking of something else. I am not an image expert and in fact I have basically given up on uploading images to Wikipedia because there always seems to be a loop hole to delete them and I have tired of arguing over it and I have tired of reuploading an image 4 or 5 times because someone doesn't like the justification or finds it on a website that says its copywritten (and that site often got if from somewhere else). The bottom line here is that this is a low resolution, historically important image taken in the 1920's (possibly prior to 1923) and possibly as a work of the US government. After doing some research it is in the collection of the Arlington House collection (of images and historical information pertaining to the cemetery and life there prior to it becoming a cemetery). If you want to delete it go for it but it seems like a huge waste of time and a huge disservice to the pedia when there are literally thousands more images that ARE obvious problems. If you delete the image let me know so I can downgrade the entire article to start class since it will no longer meet the criteria for a B class article. --

talk) 14:22, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Calliopejen1, Why not just add a Fair Use summary? The person depicted is deceased. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:48, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the person in the picture died in 1929, therefore, no new free picture can be created. It's been atleast 82 years since the picture was taken. 70.24.248.237 (talk) 09:37, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I see no copyright notice (as required by images of that era. Copyright rules not followed=PD. Even if you disagree, a FUR could easily be added. Buffs (talk) 04:04, 25 July 2011 (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.

File:Marc Lavry.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

no verifiable source Calliopejen1 (talk) 01:39, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:Jyotiba.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image was blanked by a user who asserts this image does not belong to the uploader. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:39, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:3-1.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The uploader blanked the page about two months after upload; s/he did not specify why, so I'm declining the deletion, and bringing it here. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:48, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, was used in an article that's now been A7'd. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 21:27, 23 July 2011 (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.

File:IanmaC.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, uploaded for deleted article, no encyclopedic use B (talk) 04:47, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:Ian and Tree.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, uploaded for deleted article, no encyclopedic use B (talk) 04:48, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:Broken man.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, depicts an unidentified work of art, no encyclopedic use B (talk) 04:51, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:DSCF0264.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, depicts an unidentified person - "a family friend" B (talk) 04:53, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:DSCF0307.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, depicts an unidentified person, "a family member" B (talk) 04:53, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:DavidandJasin.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, depicts an unidentified person, "from a family member" B (talk) 04:53, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:DSCF1021a.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image is used only on the user page of the uploader, who has been gone for over a year. Normally, I wouldn't see any reason to delete an image that was in use, HOWEVER, the license tag was NOT added by the uploader, but, rather, was added by someone else - "Assumed GFDL, as it was uploaded by the creator". In April 2004, language on MediaWiki:Uploadtext referring to an implied GFDL license was removed - images uploaded since that time cannot be "assumed" to be GFDL. B (talk) 04:58, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:Brandon classphoto.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, uploader is banned for copyright violations, image was uploaded without a license and someone else tagged it as GFDL. This image was uploaded in November 2004, but language from MediaWiki:Uploadtext stating that there was an implied GFDL license with uploads was removed in April 2004. B (talk) 05:05, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:Brancolook.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, unencyclopedic, GFDL presumed after April 2004 is invalid B (talk) 05:11, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:ZzzDSC 0484.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, no apparent encyclopedic use, conflicting licensing claims on image page B (talk) 05:19, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:Zarqawi 1.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm betting there's about zero chance that someone uploaded a legitimately GFDL image of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi B (talk) 05:21, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:Ted-bundy.jpg

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. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 03:28, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wooyi (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log

).

We already have free images of the subject; this image is adding nothing. What he looked like at this time/what this particular mugshot looked like is not important. It is currently using a useless, boiler-plate rationale from a template deleted long ago. J Milburn (talk) 10:10, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete there is a free mugshot of Ted Bundy in the article already. Having a second nonfree mugshot does not add anything. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:30, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Not only is this historically important image the first ever known mugshot of Bundy (which lead to his identification as a prolific serial killer), it shows him in a completely different context than the "free" mugshot, taken after he was sentenced to death. His appearance is very different and illustrates his "chameleon"-like quality. It is of significantly lower resolution than other versions (or crops) available out there. The owner of the image is a law enforcement agency that is properly credited. Doc talk 02:52, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The argument for deleting (that there is "already a mug shot in the article") is completely without merit. The article notes that Bundy looked different in virtually every photo ever taken of him, which significantly delayed his capture; and this photo shows him in a completely different context than the "free" mugshot, illustrating that "chameleon"-like quality. The owner of the image is a law enforcement agency that is properly credited. There is no logical reason to delete it. DoctorJoeE (talk) 16:14, 28 July 2011 (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.

File:Poison Sky.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Completely

replaceable by text – the sky is ignited just above the height of a suburban street. If you don't like this description, then come up with a better one, but I refuse to believe that this image is essential for readers' understanding of the article. ╟─Treasury Tag►collectorate─╢ 11:36, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:Isocarboxazid.png

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, lower quality version of File:Isocarboxazid structure.svg B (talk) 13:09, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:In bodo-colors.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, redundant to File:Bandera Bodoland.svg B (talk) 13:10, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:TTC.png

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Logo used for now-deleted advertisement article. damiens.rf 14:18, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:Bernadette pennies.jpg

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. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 03:27, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

JeanColumbia (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log

).

This nonfree screenshot is used only in a BLP, and only serves to illustrate the fact that the article subject appeared in the film from which it was taken. There is no commentary in the BLP regarding the subject's performance or visual appearance in the film, or any other subject which could bring it under NFCC#8. That the subject won an award for her performance in the film is not itself a policy-based justification for using a nonfree image without commentary. The image is not currently used in the article regarding the film itself. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 15:41, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The image depicts Bernadette Peters performing a musical number from the film. There is discussion in each article, next to the image, about Peters' performance in the film (I have just added more to this), particularly praising her performance in the musical numbers, and this image illustrates this discussion. I'll also add the image to the film's article. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:58, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Ssilvers. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 21:28, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Ssilvers makes a compelling argument to retain Jack1956 (talk) 21:50, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The additions made by Ssilvers clarifies and explains very well the purpose of this image in both the article on Peters and the film.
talk) 08:18, 27 July 2011 (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.

File:MEtrademark.JPG

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:46, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:CCtrademark.JPG

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:46, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:TCkneePivot.JPG

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, potentially are copyright issues (photo of copyrighted toy) Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:47, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:PetersPBS.JPG

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This nonfree screenshot is used only in a BLP, and only serves to illustrate the fact that the article subject appeared in the program from which it was taken. There is no commentary in the BLP regarding the subject's performance or visual appearance in the program, or any other subject which could bring it under NFCC#8. That the subject won an award for her performance in the program is not itself a policy-based justification for using a nonfree image without commentary. The image is not currently used in the article regarding the program itself. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 15:54, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The image depicts
Tony Award. There is discussion about her performance in the role slightly above the image in the article. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:58, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply
]

Reply. The commentary refers to her stage performances in 1984, not her TV performance in 1986, which is depicted in the image, and is in any case unilluminated by a simple head shot. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 17:28, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, the commentary in the article also refers to her receiving the ACE Award for the 1986 PBS broadcast - but in any case, the PBS broadcast was simply a recreation of the Broadway production, which closed in October 1985. The image shows the costume she wore and the stage properties she used. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:06, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Ssilvers. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 05:47, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I do not believe this use passes NFCC#8. – Quadell ^(talk) 20:08, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for the reasons stated by Ssilvers Jack1956 (talk)

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.

File:TCtrademark.JPG

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:04, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:PetersMuppets.JPG

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This nonfree screenshot is used only in a BLP, and only serves to illustrate the fact that the article subject appeared in the program from which it was taken. There is no commentary in the BLP regarding the subject's performance or visual appearance in the program, or any other subject which could bring it under NFCC#8. That the subject was nominated for an award for her performance in the program is not itself a policy-based justification for using a nonfree image without commentary. The image is not currently used in the article regarding the program itself. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 16:06, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The image depicts Bernadette Peters in her appearance with the muppets. There is considerable discussion about her appearance in the episode near the image in the article, discussing the characters shown in the image with Peters. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:58, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That is simply not the case. There is no commentary regarding Peters' appearance or performance. There is simply a plot summary of a sketch, which image adds nothing of significance to. NFCC#8 requires "Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." In what way does a picture of Peters and several Muppets increase the reader's understanding of that plot summary? Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 22:20, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it said that she received an
Emmy Awards for her guest-starring roles on The Muppet Show (1977) and Ally McBeal (2001). On The Muppet Show, after Robin the Frog is ignored by his uncle Kermit, Peters teaches him to believe in himself by singing the song "Just One Person" to him (pictured at right).[followed by refs] This number is included in the album The Muppet Show 2, Peters was one of The Muppets' guests when they hosted The Tonight Show in 1979, again singing "Just One Person" to Robin, and she appeared in other episodes with the Muppets."[ref] I could add, if it would help, that Peters was the first person to sing the song on the show, and that after Peters' appearance, the Muppets used the number repeatedly. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:58, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply
]

Not to put too fine a point on it, but in what way does a picture of Peters and several Muppets increase the reader's understanding of that burst of exposition? In particular, how can the reader possibly gather any significant information regarding the song from that picture? It's not a good idea to go off on a detailed tangent in the middle of a BLP to try to justify the inclusion of a nonfree image; it says getting the picture in is more important than presenting a balanced view of the subject's career. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 23:13, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Ssilvers. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 05:47, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Ssilvers makes a compelling argument. Jack1956 (talk) 21:46, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I do not believe this use passes NFCC #8. – Quadell ^(talk) 20:07, 25 July 2011 (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.

File:Innovativeinterfacesincheadquarters.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lower-resolution version of File:Innovative Interfaces HQ.jpg. Kelly ^hi! 16:34, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:Dlgrayfreemason.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

License suspect. Released public domain by uploader, but the uploader claims he is not the subject and does not give a source for the photo, nor does he claim it as his work. If any of the above are true, where did he get professional photos of the subject, and the right to release them freely? If they are false, then the license is inappropriate. MSJapan (talk) 22:45, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:Plateau opening 03400.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Claimed as both free and fair use. If free, no evidence of permission. If non-free, has no valid rationale. –

T/C) 21:25, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:Robertagresta.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, questionable licensing status. –

T/C) 21:28, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:Yi4.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File is not used anywhere and is an orphan. Not useful.

T|C|E-Mail 22:15, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:Dlgraycatholic.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

License suspect. Released public domain by uploader, but the uploader claims he is not the subject and does not give a source for the photo, nor does he claim it as his work. If any of the above are true, where did he get professional photos of the subject, and the right to release them freely? If they are false, then the license is inappropriate. MSJapan (talk) 22:43, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:MultiJKN Logo.png

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently a self-made logo of a YouTube user - see http://www.youtube.com/user/MultiJKN - not a notable person; therefore, the image seems to be out-of-scope; a text-logo with no purpose for the English Wikipedia. And if it *was* a real, company logo, it'd presumably be copyrighted. Unused. Chzz ► 23:35, 22 July 2011 (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.

File:Image Of Amarpura.PNG

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have a hard time trying to justify the use of a Google Earth image here, especially when there already is a map, and when there is one line of prose in the article.

Wha? 23:41, 22 July 2011 (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.