Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 April 20

< April 19	April 21 >

April 20[edit]

File:Vincent Cota.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 ⚡ 02:01, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Low Quality, Unencyclopedic, no foreseeable use, vanity photo. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 00:11, 20 April 2010 (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:SnowballGeography.gif[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 ⚡ 04:02, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File was asserted to fail WP:NFCC#1 and tagged with {{subst:rfu}}. This is purely a procedural nomination and is not a representation of my opinions on this matter in any way whatsoever. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 00:56, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Per the talk page discussion, the source data is not known to be available, so any alternative version of the image would either be inaccurate or a derivative work. Thus a free alternative cannot be created, as claimed by the original nominator. Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 01:01, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This is simply one possible reconstruction of Snowball Earth, and (this image) is not discussed in the article at all. It's current use is largely decorative. It does not add significant understanding of the topic, beyond the current text, and its use fail WP:NFCC#8 - Peripitus (Talk) 13:21, 4 May 2010 (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:Icicle Works - Evangeline excerpt.ogg[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 ⚡ 02:01, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Content of song not discussed in article. WP:NFC. This is (hopefully) a prompt to get some sourced commentary in the article. Dawnseeker2000 01:16, 20 April 2010 (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:Prince Georges Plaza Metro.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) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:12, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Photo is orphaned, and entirely out of focus. SchuminWeb (Talk) 02:29, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The only thing I see wrong with this image, is that there's a little more shadow than the existing image currently being used for the article. ----DanTD (talk) 15:07, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

- Look at the full-size image. There is nothing in focus in that image. SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:53, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the far-side platform is completely out of focus. PhilKnight (talk) 18:51, 28 April 2010 (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:L'enfant Plaza Metro .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 ⚡ 21:12, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, out of focus. SchuminWeb (Talk) 02:30, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - I actually like the contrasts of two different colored lightings at the station, and the only thing convincing me that the quality is poor is the blurry digital readout signs along the platforms. I was leaning towards the possiblity of supporting this deletion, until I checked it again. ----DanTD (talk) 15:17, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - the platforms, including the people on them, and the signs, are blurred. PhilKnight (talk) 19:00, 28 April 2010 (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:Potomac Avenue Metro Station.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:03, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, out of focus. SchuminWeb (Talk) 02:30, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The lighting really does something for this image. ----DanTD (talk) 21:40, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and transwiki to the commons. The ceiling is mostly in focus, while the floor, and electronic sign aren't. Good composition though, and could be useful. PhilKnight (talk) 18:55, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply - I just did it, although I wanted to rename the file "Potomac Avenue Metro Station from Escalator," to distinguish the name from the others. ----DanTD (talk) 15:54, 29 April 2010 (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:Newcarrollton.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:03, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, low quality (dirty lens). SchuminWeb (Talk) 02:34, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - You may be right about the quality, but the image shows a part of the station that others don't. If necessary, I wouldn't mind seeing a new version of the file with some quality adjustments. ----DanTD (talk) 04:59, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be out at New Carrollton on May 1 if current plans hold, and so I'll see what I can do. SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:52, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - the image is a long way from featured quality, but is just about usable. PhilKnight (talk) 18:57, 28 April 2010 (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:Saraswat back 1.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 ⚡ 02:01, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why a photograph of the written work is useful for either current use. Seems to be an unnecessary/decorative non-free use. (ESkog)^(Talk) 15:28, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This image shows the history of Gujarati literature in Gujarati language.

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:Dayaram1.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 ⚡ 02:01, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rationale inaccurate; this is not a photo of the individual. (ESkog)^(Talk) 15:30, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is photo of concert of poet's poetries.

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:OutOfYourMindSample.ogg[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 ⚡ 02:01, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Content of song not discussed in article. WP:NFC. This is (hopefully) a prompt to get some sourced commentary in the article. Dawnseeker2000 18:17, 20 April 2010 (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:Paul McCartney this one.ogg[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 ⚡ 02:01, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Content of song not discussed in article. WP:NFC. This is (hopefully) a prompt to get some sourced commentary in the article. Dawnseeker2000 18:34, 20 April 2010 (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:Mats.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 ⚡ 02:01, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, low quality image that has a suitable "replacement" already being used in an article. Rockfang (talk) 22:41, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The relevant article appears to be Mats Levén.--Rockfang (talk) 22:42, 20 April 2010 (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:Kosovo-in-Europe.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 ⚡ 02:01, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, higher quality alternatives exist. Quibik (talk) 22:48, 20 April 2010 (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.