Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 November 14

< November 13	November 15 >

November 14[edit]

File:NamSangMi JejuAir.jpg[edit]

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: Speedy Delete per WP:G7 by Fastily. I'^mperator 19:26, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:NamSangMi JejuAir.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by JKSarang (notify | contribs).

Non-free image which does nothing other than show what the person looks like. Replaceable by a free alternative, which we already have. PC78 (talk) 00:14, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can delete it now. JKSarang 00:28, 14 November 2009 (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:DaHae ILoveRock'nRoll.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:11, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:DaHae ILoveRock'nRoll.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by InkHeart (notify | contribs).

No contextual significance for this image - only serves decorative purpose Mosmof (talk) 04:41, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image is described in the content of the article under discography there for it is Wiki fair use. And there is no album cover so I used this photo instead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Colleen16 (talk • contribs) 01:42, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Seeing the screenshot does not significantly increase reader understanding of the discography as required by WP:NFCC#8. The article content does not discuss the screenshot. (If there were an album cover, it would be unacceptable too.) (Note: User:Colleen16 appears to be the same person as User:InkHeart.) —teb728 t c 10:22, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The image gives the viewer an idea of what the artist's performance was like. And it also shows an important performance in the artist's life, for it was her first single. Ink Heart♥ 12:51, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NFCC#8. Copyrighted image that does not enhance reader understanding of the article. Inkheart's fair-use rationale is unconvincing. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 03:17, 20 November 2009 (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:DramaCity Caps.jpg[edit]

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, nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 03:02, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:DramaCity Caps.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by InkHeart (notify | contribs).

Not sure why a montage of screencaps are needed. Title card or promo poster would be more appropriate for identification. Mosmof (talk) 04:43, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

These are screencaptures for the article. Image is described in the content of the article thus it is Wiki fair use. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Colleen16 (talk • contribs) 01:43, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:NFCC#1: The textual part on the left of this image from the program homepage, which would probably be public domain, would better serve to identify the program. Fails also WP:NFCC#3a: Multiple non-free items are used in an montage where one title card or promo poster would be of better value for identification. Fails also WP:NFCC#3b: Image size 711 × 2,000 pixels is way too large for a non-free image. (Note: User:Colleen16 appears to be the same person as User:InkHeart.) —teb728 t c 10:47, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Caps replaced by suggested image 3. Ink Heart♥ 12:29, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination withdrawn - the uploader has replaced the montage with the title card, which I believe falls in line with WP:NFCC. --Mosmof (talk) 15:10, 18 November 2009 (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:Cityhall OST.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:11, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cityhall OST.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by InkHeart (notify | contribs).

Non-free image that not used for identification or critical commentary. Mosmof (talk) 04:47, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image is described in the content of the article under Soundtrack thus it is Wiki fair use. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Colleen16 (talk • contribs) 00:44, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The article discusses the soundtrack, but seeing the cover does not significantly increase reader understanding of the article as required by WP:NFCC#8. The article content does not even mention the cover. (Note: User:Colleen16 appears to be the same person as User:InkHeart.) —teb728 t c 11:06, 15 November 2009 (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:2007 Christmas Card.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:11, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:2007 Christmas Card.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Denali134 (notify | contribs).

OR, UE Skier Dude (talk) 05:29, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Highly unencyclopedic; orphaned as well. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 03:17, 20 November 2009 (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:BoomerangPenis.JPG[edit]

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 G4 by Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:07, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:BoomerangPenis.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by JADPadgett (notify | contribs).

OR, UE Skier Dude (talk) 06:24, 14 November 2009 (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:OrganizationalChart.pdf[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:11, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:OrganizationalChart.pdf (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Servant of the King (notify | contribs).

OR, no target article or encyc use provided Skier Dude (talk) 06:50, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Orphaned file with no encyclopedic use. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 03:17, 20 November 2009 (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:OrganizationalChart-2.pdf[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:11, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:OrganizationalChart-2.pdf (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Servant of the King (notify | contribs).

OR, no target article or encyc use provided Skier Dude (talk) 06:51, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Orphaned file with no encyclopedic use. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 03:17, 20 November 2009 (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:SOCoalinga.jpg[edit]

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 Skier Dude (talk) 05:06, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:SOCoalinga.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Tillman (notify | contribs).

Image of oil field building in 1930. Fails NFCC#8 (contextual significance) in that it the building itself including the prominent sign on the roof, and accompanying text in Coalinga Oil Field do not justify usage of this image. Optigan13 (talk) 07:03, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retain: The (very prominent) identification signs painted on the roof are a visual "hook" to lead the reader into the corporate history of Standard Oil and successors at the Coalinga oilfield, which we discuss in some detail in the article. I think that's sufficient contextual significance to justify fair use of this (probably copyright-expired) image. Thanks, Pete Tillman (talk) 04:26, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I've read the article (which is a good read) and the image does not add enough for it to pass NFCC#8. That said the image is c.1930 and according to the source it's from a collection at "R. C. Baker Memorial Museum, Inc." from an unknown Photographer. I'm almost completely certain that the copyright on this was not renewed (if it was ever published with a (c) note) and so the licence should be {{PD-US-not renewed}} - Peripitus (Talk) 11:47, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I disagree with the nominator and Peripitus; I think this image adds decent contextual significance to the article in question. Sounds like the copyright may also be expired, in which case the NFCC question is moot. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 03:17, 20 November 2009 (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:Georgecarlinmugshot.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:11, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Georgecarlinmugshot.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Alkivar (notify | contribs).

In the context of free images such as File:Carlin.jpg, this doesn't add much. PhilKnight (talk) 17:53, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - There is not 1 single valid rationale displayed on the image's page. Each time the image is used, it needs a separate, detailed, named rationale. It did not have one when I tagged it and it still doesn't.--Rockfang (talk) 22:44, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep - useful in illustrating George's trouble with the law resulting from his routines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.194.10.2 (talk) 10:17, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - We have news accounts that detail his brushes with the law. A mugshot is pretty useless for that purpose. --Mosmof (talk) 14:19, 20 November 2009 (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:Icon-waffen-ss-pic.jpeg[edit]

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 Seresin (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:11, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Icon-waffen-ss-pic.jpeg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Willy turner (notify | contribs).

Replaceable unfree image, fails WP:NFCC. There are very many free images in Commons:Category:Waffen-SS that serve to illustrate this organization or its soldiers. Sandstein 18:18, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Such as for instance File:Briefmarke Waffen SS.jpg. Sandstein 18:19, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neither of the examples yoy gave is a poster. // Liftarn (talk) 17:20, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now per Liftarn. I don't see evidence that this image is replaceable. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 03:17, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I'm no expert, however I was under the impression the Nuremburg trial ruled the SS was a criminal organization, so I would have guessed this would be public domain. Otherwise, if this is copyrighted (in which case who owns this image?) then free alternatives are available. PhilKnight (talk) 20:22, 22 November 2009 (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:McAfee.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:11, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:McAfee.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by LordBleen (notify | contribs).

OR, OB -FASTILY ^(TALK) 18:35, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Obsolete image of McAfee logo. Orphaned to boot. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 03:17, 20 November 2009 (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.