Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 October 5

< October 4	October 6 >

October 5[edit]

File:1st page Photo Banner.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 ⚡ 11:40, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned image. Absent uploader. PhilKnight (talk) 00:08, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Derivative work with no clear indication of where the source images came from. Users other uploads appear to come from various sources, including a website of a company they have stated they work (or worked) for. Soundvisions1 (talk) 00:25, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per above. Isn't even used anywhere. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 ^(Contact) 19:02, 10 October 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:1wikidrumbo.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 ⚡ 20:10, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Absent uploader. Web resolution and claimed as free. User's only other image upload was a non-free image, which was tagged as free. PhilKnight (talk) 00:11, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The users other uploaded was a Joan Baez album cover that was also claimed as "self". That was changed to "fair use". Although there is no clear indication of who this image is of as there is no author, source or description given, it is presumed this image is of a living person, John French (musician) as it is being used in their article. Soundvisions1 (talk) 00:32, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - this image isn't identical, but could have been taken from the same photo shoot. PhilKnight (talk) 00:49, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Even better - it was lifted from the drummers myspace page: John 'Drumbo' French's Photos. There is no indication of who the photographer is, in most cases lifting an image from Myspace would make the image a speedy via F9, but given the discussion elsewhere I am not going to be the one to tag it as such. Soundvisions1 (talk) 01:18, 5 October 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:Vbappu.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, as all concerns have been worked out. SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:10, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No license information at source. Possible candidate for fair use Vssun (talk) 02:32, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep See the edit history. It was originally uploaded with a claim of fair use, but when the uploader received a bot warning that no license template was present, s/he decided that a noncommercial license was appropriate and proceeded to place the commercial license tag that caused you to nominate this for deletion. I've reverted to its original version; unless you dispute the possibility of this being used fairly, I can't see any reason to support its deletion. Nyttend (talk) 22:23, 11 October 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:Numa.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 ⚡ 11:40, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:NUMA.svg mooP (talk) 02:36, 5 October 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:VideoGen.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:40, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tiny and unused in any article. GrapedApe (talk) 03:42, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unused file. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 ^(Contact) 17:59, 10 October 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:ThonExpressSurvivorLogo.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 ⚡ 11:40, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Logo. Unused in any article. Probably a copyright violation of the Survivor (U.S. TV series) logo. GrapedApe (talk) 03:42, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unused logo, possible copyright violation. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 ^(Contact) 19:03, 10 October 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:B0000DZ6KE.03. SS500 SCLZZZZZZZ .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 ⚡ 11:40, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3 as multiple non-free files are being used when one would suffice. This alternate album cover is not significantly different from the main cover to justify its use. — ξ ^xplicit 05:37, 5 October 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:Houman Javid.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 ⚡ 20:45, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not used in any articles and no obvious uses; article about the singer the picture depicts was deleted a long time ago. File page seems to be being used as an alternative to an article, with a list of albums and concerts. Bencherlite ^Talk 11:25, 5 October 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:MegaDriveBox.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: Apparently does not meet WP:NFCC #1 and #8. Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:11, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This image is used "To show how Sega marketed the Sega Mega Drive by including Sonic The Hedgehog". It's not clear why that needs to be shown, nor why merely mentioning that Sonic was bundled is not enough. J Milburn (talk) 13:38, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have edited the rationale to hopefully make it more clear. Added another reason why it should be shown.--SexyKick 14:43, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it adds to the article--BeastSystem (talk) 17:35, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:NFCC#8, as this is something where a non-free image is not necessary, as it is sufficient to describe what the console is bundled with using text alone. SchuminWeb (Talk) 18:53, 12 October 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:Roalddahlcavalier061960.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 Angusmclellan (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: neither the fair-use rationale nor the sparse prose in the article Cavalier (magazine) are sufficient to justify keeping this non-free image as it clearly fails WP:NFCC#8 because it does not add to the reader's understanding of the magazine. ww2censor (talk) 15:51, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Communicates presentation, type fonts, display type, name author, interior layout, use of reprints, style of interior illustration, high quality of fiction. Pepso2 (talk) 16:05, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

However, there is no prose commentary about what you allege above in the article itself nor is this stated in the purpose for use field of the fair-use rationale, besides which the illustration by H Baer, which is the major part of the image, may well still be in copyright. ww2censor (talk) 21:50, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{subst:ffd2ALPFA_color_logo.jpg‎|Uploader= |Reason=Obsolete}} Marketpr (talk) 16:05, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Decorative non-free, now orphaned. Uploader has been warned about uploading unnecessary non-free images, and this image is unfortunately just the tip of the iceberg. SchuminWeb (Talk) 22:24, 10 October 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:B-tree.svg[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 ⚡ 20:45, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This file was orphaned and unknowingly I made a similar image and uploaded it to Commons under the same file name. I noticed when I tried to replace B-tree.png with my B-tree.svg and got this one instead. This image is not entirely correct — it does not make it clear that the pointers to other nodes come (conceptually) between the values. I guess this may be the reason it wasn't used originally. CyHawk (talk) 17:31, 5 October 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:DS vs Mahanama 2008.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 ⚡ 20:45, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Western Band Snr.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs)

File:Mahanama logo.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs)

File:Mahanama flag.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs)

To understand these images one has to look at the users uploaders history and also look at their talk page. The user uploaded all images using a {{PD-self}} tag, however they also manually added text depending on the images. Some were marked "used by Permission" and some were marked as fair use. First these are all conflicted licenses. Some were deleted because of this: File:Chess2007.jpg, File:Cricket Tour India 2008.jpg, File:Cricket Tour India 2008.jpg and File:Cricket Tour India 2008.jpg as a few examples. A look at the users talk page helps to learn a few things as well. The user was placing copyrighted text into articles and a standard warning template was placed on the users page suggesting a note be placed on the source website that said text was available for re-use under the GFDL or released into the public domain. This was done on January 25, 2008. On the same day the uploader noted that "Copyright Permission for WikiMedia" had been stated on the source website. It is important to note at this time is was based on what a generic message template had said and was placed in regards to text, not images. Now is where it gets a bit more complicated. As all of the image uploads claimed {{PD-self}} it implies the uploader actually is the copyright holder, depsite any other website information. However in Febraury 2008 both File:Chess2007.jpg and File:Black n Gold.jpg were tagged for lacking a FUR. The uploader commented on both that "Image was taken from the online edition of the news paper, its released to the public by the news paper company for fair use." This indicates not all image are really {{PD-self}}. NOw you need to jump forward to July 28, 2008 - Six images were uploaded, each one using a "self" license and each one linking to the "new" terms of use on the website: Terms of Use. Every one of those 6 images was speedied via I3/F3 - Images licensed as "for non-commercial use only", "no derivative use", "for Wikipedia use only" or "used with permission."

Now, and the reason this is a bit long, I came across one image which has the manually written summary that said it was "used with permission", I tagged it with I3/F3. In looking over the other uploads I discovered all of the above, so I tagged other images as such. They were all declined because the {{PD-self}} tag gave permission and the Terms of Use gave permission. It is unfortunate the speedies were declined without any real research on the issue. As stated already above there are conflicting licenses. And further the actual source website sates "All rights reserved" on every single page, image, artwork and even the Terms of Use is conflicted in that it is explicit that You may not copy (other than a copy for personal use), modify, distribute, transmit, display, perform, reproduce, transfer, resell, or republish any of the Contents of this Website without the prior written consent of Vidura College - Colombo, but than states Content along with its images for re-use is permitted for WikiMedia under the GFDL or released into the public domain license. (Important to note the exact phrase under the GFDL or released into the public domain is used - directly cut and and pasted form the generic message about copyrighted text use, right down to the italics.) The three main issues now are 1: It is explicit in that WikiMedia (Not Wikipedia) has permission to use; 2: Nobody else *except* WikiMedia has permission for use under those terms; and 3: Not one other page on the entire website states the same thing. Soundvisions1 (talk) 18:13, 5 October 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:50-edits.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 Angusmclellan (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. From 2005. Looks like it was meant to be used for a userbox for making 50+ edits. Soundvisions1 (talk) 23:51, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - redundant to {{User contrib|50}}. PleaseStand ^(talk) 02:08, 6 October 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:537d936.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 Angusmclellan (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unused personal photo. Soundvisions1 (talk) 23:56, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unused file. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 ^(Contact) 18:00, 10 October 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.