Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 June 15

< June 14	June 16 >

June 15

File:Islandsinthestream The Office.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image not critically discussed in the article. It doesn't help me understanding the topic better in any way. Fails

Stefan2 (talk) 00:14, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

Keep - Sigh... The deletionists aren't even reading the FURs anymore. Per the image's FUR: "The scene was commented upon by critics. Michael Sciannamea from TV Squad noted that the scene allowed the audience to see Michael's "vulnerabilities", but also allowed the audience to walk away from the episode "feeling good that he did make it to Jim's party." [1] IGN named the scene one of the "Top Ten Awkward Moments" in The Office, but noted that the fact that Jim joined Michael "breaks the tension". [2] The picture is elaborated in the "Reception" section of the parent article. [3] As for not understanding the topic, it illustrates the mockumentary conceit of the episode as well as illustrates the scene that was praised. Shooting of the scene is discussed in the "Production" section, and the reception section, as already mentioned.--Gen. Quon (talk) 00:35, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The fact that critics have commented upon the scene does not automatically mean that a Wikipedia article provides critical commentary. --
  Stefan2 (talk) 00:38, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  - It's certainly sourced enough. Per the rules for keeping a non-free file, the shot must be of something that is "the subject of sourced commentary", which this is; it's linked to three, reliable and separate sources that mention the scene. In two of them, the scene is the main emphasis.--Gen. Quon (talk) 00:45, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - I can't find any critical commentary anywhere in the article, and in particular not anywhere close to the place where the image is located within the article. It is thus obvious that the image isn't used to illustrate some critical commentary in the article. It is irrelevant whether or not some critical commentary of the image might exist somewhere else on the Internet. --
      Stefan2 (talk) 00:59, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply
      ]

Delete "Critical commentary" does not mean that someone has mentioned something in a review—a critic will frequently make reference to the entire plot of an episode, but that doesn't justify thousands of potential screen captures. The question to ask is, "will the audience really understand this without the visuals?" In the case of
2001: A Space Odyssey (film), I added a video that cannot adequately be explained with text (or even video, really), but this image is just Michael and Jim standing with a microphone. Anyone can understand that from text. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:43, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete, Koavf has it exactly right. Whatever it is that was the object of critical interest in that scene, this image does nothing to help me understand it. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:56, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Koavf and Fut. Perf.; the image alone is worthless since it does not gives the reader any meaning my itself. —
21 17:30, 20 June 2012 (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:Michael pam dream team.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Purely ornamental, invalid FUR. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:40, 15 June 2012 (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:Naked Snake.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really see the purpose of this image. There is already a different image of the same character in the article.

Stefan2 (talk) 10:50, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

Because it's the same character in a different game depicting him in his younger days. Personally I would just replace the image with something of a better quality, since it's a screenshot from an early portion of the game before he obtains his bandanna and eyepatch. Jonny2x4 (talk) 16:10, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, the need for an additional character is not explained in the FUR. Fails
  Stefan2 (talk) 19:22, 15 June 2012 (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:Angelo Castro Jr.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 as

F7 by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:03, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

non-free image of a widely photographed, recently deceased, person. A free image could be found with some judicious searching. Fails NFCC#1 Peripitus (Talk) 12:10, 15 June 2012 (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:Ryanair passengers.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned.

Stefan2 (talk) 12:37, 15 June 2012 (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:Sladeroguesgalleryalternate.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails

Stefan2 (talk) 13:14, 15 June 2012 (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:Vitus.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused image without foreseeable use.

Stefan2 (talk) 14:07, 15 June 2012 (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:Hi Hi JAPANESE.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails

Stefan2 (talk) 15:31, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

Huff or replace with a slightly higher-res version, enough that you can discern what the cover looks like. I was straining my eyes to understand that. 68.173.113.106 (talk) 01:58, 17 June 2012 (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:Barack Obama Al Arabiya interview 2009.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that Barack Obama appeared on television is already adequately described in text. There is no need for an additional image to describe this.

Stefan2 (talk) 16:02, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete per nom. —
21 17:31, 20 June 2012 (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:Yeh hai Bombay meri jaan.ogg

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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails

Stefan2 (talk) 16:05, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

I failed to get your point.What exactly is the Matter? 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS (talk) 16:14, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- There is no critical discussion of the song in the article. There is nothing in the article which explains why this exact song (as opposed to some other song) has to be used in the article. Non-free files are only to be used if they can't be avoided, but in this case, it would be possible to use a different song, for example a free one. --
  Stefan2 (talk) 19:31, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply
  ]

So, you meant to say,discussion should take place,a'right.I better go and make some changes in article thnks for the lead --25 CENTS VICTORIOUS (talk) 12:00, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Now,the file is used in this article with reference.I recommend you to have a look. --25 CENTS VICTORIOUS (talk) 06:28, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, obviously. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:51, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, no assesrtion of why it is needed on the article. —
21 17:32, 20 June 2012 (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:JEP Article 15th June 2012 Friends from Normandy.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails

Stefan2 (talk) 16:07, 15 June 2012 (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:JEP Article 15th June 2012 King Who Fled from Island Curses.pdf

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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails

Stefan2 (talk) 16:07, 15 June 2012 (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:AT-271.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Broken/lost file. Not used at the moment. Text says "Military AT-271 folding antenna" and it should be possible for someone to take a new photo. MGA73 (talk) 18:08, 15 June 2012 (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:GoldenGuppyAward.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Broken/lost file. It is only used in Template:WP:AQF Golden Guppy Award that is unused. I suggest to delete both the file and the template. MGA73 (talk) 18:10, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Huff (delete). 68.173.113.106 (talk) 01:54, 17 June 2012 (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:GraciasMarket.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Broken/lost file. The text says "A Honduran woman shopping for vegetables at a stand in the Gracias, Lempira market." - it is nothing special so I suggest to delete the file. MGA73 (talk) 18:13, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Huff. 68.173.113.106 (talk) 01:56, 17 June 2012 (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:ST-TNG Attached.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free TV episode screenshot, used in infobox. Simply shows two regular cast members of the show in a nondistinct situation, standing somewhere. Supposedly it illustrates them as captives in a "holding cell", with some device attached "to the rear of their necks" – but the image shows neither the cell nor the rear of their necks (they are seen from the front), so the information value of the image is nil. Rather blatant NFCC#8 failure, as so often: uploader argues that the scene from which this is taken is somehow important for the plot, but (as so often) fails to understand that what matters is something else: is the image important for understanding the scene? It isn't. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:51, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comm: I uploaded a more pertinent image which does show the electronic device "attached" to the back of one of the two Star Trek crew--who were in the Prytt cell but then escaped namely Captain Picard here. The electronic device is relevant here since it is the exact title of this Star Trek episode--Attached--and the image shows Dr. Crusher being captured by the Prytt security forces with phasers being pointed in her general direction. So, its also another dangerous situation--only this time you do see the electronic device which the Prytt attempted to use to extract information from Captain Picard and Dr. Crusher. I trust this replacement better satisfies Future Perfect at Sunrise's NFCC#8 concerns. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:30, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- This one is somewhat less ridiculously unsuitable than the first, but it is still not convincing. There is still nothing in that new image that is necessary for making the episode understood. You seem to be still stuck with this fundamental misunderstanding that things should be illustrated just because they are important for the episode. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:44, 16 June 2012 (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.