Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 October 8
October 8
[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⚡ 02:01, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:BSicon vBHF-KBFa.svg (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Ansbaradigeidfran (notify | contribs | uploads).
- Duplicate of File:BSicon vBHF-KBHFa.svg on Commons. Created and uploaded by 2 different users. — Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 00:18, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete No need to have it here if there's already a duplicate on Commons. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 (Contact) 12:41, 14 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.
- 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, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:BSicon StationOpen norail.png (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Oshvision (notify | contribs | uploads).
- Orphaned, implausible BSicon (why would there be an open station on an abandoned line?) Wrong colors, too. — Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 00:22, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Orphaned file, simply no need to keep. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 (Contact) 11:10, 14 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.
- 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, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:InezHaynesGillmore AngelIsland.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Bruce1ee (notify | contribs | uploads).
- Non-free image taken from a non-free modern edition of Inez Haynes Irwin's Angel Island for use in the article on that novel. The first edition was published in 1914 and is in the public domain. This image is replaceable by something taken from the first edition and does not meet WP:NFCC#1. Angus McLellan (Talk) 16:13, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Yes, the 1914 edition of Angel Island is in the public domain, but I can't find a picture of that cover anywhere. None of the references to the 1914 edition I've found (and I've spent a long time looking) show the cover. I propose that the non-free cover be kept until the cover of the first edition can be found. —Bruce1eetalk 05:36, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SchuminWeb (Talk) 02:57, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
KeepA good-faith attempt has been made to find a free alternative, so it is reasonable to assume none is available so WP:NFCC#1 doesn't apply. me_and 20:59, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]- Delete Revised per VernoWhitney's note below. me_and 09:27, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Fails WP:NFCC#1. The lack of a picture online does not mean that it's impossible to get. I spent about 5 minutes searching online and discovered that Ohio State University has two copies of the 1914 edition available, so I'm sure a motivated Wikipedian could track a local copy down. VernoWhitney (talk) 23:23, 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.
- 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, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Rob12.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Upkildare (notify | contribs | uploads).
- Unused image, this image was used from the Robbie Robinson hoax article. JJ98 (Talk) 03:12, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Unused file. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 (Contact) 09:13, 14 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.
- 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, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Blessed Kunjachan.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Pamparam (notify | contribs | uploads).
- copyright violation http://www.ramapuramforanechurch.org/feast.htm Vssun (talk) 15:10, 8 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.
- 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, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:NHCsite.png (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Drybones5 (notify | contribs | uploads).
- Unused and unlikely to be useful here or on Commons. me_and 15:29, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Unused file. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 (Contact) 09:14, 14 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.
- 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, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Moulai Nuruddin DonGaon,Arangabad.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Md_iet (notify | contribs | uploads).
- not really self-created - no exif data, border, low-res, uploader has copyright issues. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:21, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The subject is a historical,religious personality of Dawoodi Bohra,his mousoleum photo are common and considered to be in public domain,may pl. consider.--Md iet (talk) 04:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Assertions of public domain are insufficient, no supporting evidence. VernoWhitney (talk) 12:31, 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.
- 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, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Grave 25th Dai Syedna Jalal.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Md_iet (notify | contribs | uploads).
- not really self-made - low-res, border, no exif, uploader has copyright issues Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:24, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The subject is a historical,religious personality of Dawoodi Bohra,his grave photo are common and considered to be in public domain,may pl. consider.--Md iet (talk) 04:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Assertions of public domain are insufficient, no supporting evidence. VernoWhitney (talk) 12:31, 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.
- 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, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Mausoleum Dai Burhanpur.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Md_iet (notify | contribs | uploads).
- not self-made: no exif, border, low-res, uploader has copyright issues Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:31, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The subject is a historical,religious personality of Dawoodi Bohra,his mousoleum photo are common and considered to be in public domain,may pl. consider.--Md iet (talk) 04:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Assertions of public domain are insufficient, no supporting evidence. VernoWhitney (talk) 12:31, 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.
- 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, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Roja Sayedna Hatim,Hutaib,Yemen.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Md_iet (notify | contribs | uploads).
- not self-made: low-res, no exif, uploader has copyright issues Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:34, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The subject is a historical,religious personality of Dawoodi Bohra,his mousoleum photo are common and considered to be in public domain,may pl. consider.--Md iet (talk) 04:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Assertions of public domain are insufficient, no supporting evidence. VernoWhitney (talk) 12:31, 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.
- 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, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Kaka Akela well.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Md_iet (notify | contribs | uploads).
- not self-made: border, low-res, no exif, uploader has copyright issues Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:36, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The subject is a historical,religious vanue of Dawoodi Bohra,the place is common and considered to be in public domain,may pl. consider.--Md iet (talk) 04:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Assertions of public domain are insufficient, no supporting evidence. VernoWhitney (talk) 12:31, 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.
- 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, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Dai with Egypt president.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Md_iet (notify | contribs | uploads).
- photo of a photo - no information on the source of the underlying image Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:38, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, likely copyvio - see Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Md iet. VernoWhitney (talk) 12:31, 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.
- 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, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:47th Dai Abdul Qadir Najmuddin .JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Md_iet (notify | contribs | uploads).
- photo of an artwork - no info on source/copyright of underlying image Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:39, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The subject is a historical,religious personality of Dawoodi Bohra,his mousoleum photo are common and considered to be in public domain,may pl. consider.--Md iet (talk) 04:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Assertions of public domain are insufficient, no supporting evidence. VernoWhitney (talk) 12:31, 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.
- 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, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Grave Ma Fatema ,Imam Hasan and other Imams.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Md_iet (notify | contribs | uploads).
- appears to be a photo of some sort of artwork, no info on source/copyright of underlying image Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:40, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The subject is a historical,religious place of islam,the photo are common and considered to be in public domain,may pl. consider.--Md iet (talk) 04:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Assertions of public domain are insufficient, no supporting evidence. VernoWhitney (talk) 12:31, 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.
- 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, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Zarih sayyeda Nafisa.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Md_iet (notify | contribs | uploads).
- photo of a photo Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:42, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The subject is a historical,religious personality of islam,his mousoleum photo are common and considered to be in public domain,may pl. consider.--Md iet (talk) 04:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Assertions of public domain are insufficient, no supporting evidence. VernoWhitney (talk) 12:31, 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.
- 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, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Mausoleum Dai Dawood bin Qutub Shah.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Md_iet (notify | contribs | uploads).
- not self-created: low-res, border, no exif, uploader has copyright issues Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:45, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The subject is a historical,religious personality of Dawoodi Bohra,his mousoleum photo are common and considered to be in public domain,may pl. consider.--Md iet (talk) 04:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Assertions of public domain are insufficient, no supporting evidence. VernoWhitney (talk) 12:31, 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.
- 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, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Syedna Nurmohammad Nuruddin.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Md_iet (notify | contribs | uploads).
- not self-created: low-res, border, no exif, uploader has copyright issues Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:46, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The subject is a historical,religious personality of Dawoodi Bohra,his mousoleum photo are common and considered to be in public domain,may pl. consider.--Md iet (talk) 04:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Assertions of public domain are insufficient, no supporting evidence. VernoWhitney (talk) 12:31, 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.
- 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, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Imam Husain.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Md_iet (notify | contribs | uploads).
- photo of modern artwork Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:46, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The subject is a historical,religious personality of islam,his photo are common and considered to be in public domain,may pl. consider.--Md iet (talk) 04:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Assertions of public domain are insufficient, no supporting evidence. VernoWhitney (talk) 12:31, 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.
- 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, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Taher Safuddin.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Md_iet (notify | contribs | uploads).
- photo of a photo Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:47, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The subject is a historical,religious personality of Dawoodi Bohra,his photo are common and considered to be in public domain,may pl. consider.--Md iet (talk) 04:33, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Assertions of public domain are insufficient, no supporting evidence. VernoWhitney (talk) 12:31, 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.
- 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⚡ 02:01, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:BSicon STR+BSrpl3.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Dkpintar (notify | contribs | uploads).
- File:BSicon STR+BSrl9.png (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Dkpintar (notify | contribs | uploads)
- File:BSicon CPRL.png (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Dkpintar (notify | contribs | uploads)
- File:BSicon STR+BSrl3.png (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Dkpintar (notify | contribs | uploads)
- File:STR+BSrl.svg-1-.png (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Dkpintar (notify | contribs | uploads)
- File:Curve0908 dABCrl.bmp (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Dkpintar (notify | contribs | uploads)
- Bad BSicon, RDT is for route diagrams, not track diagrams. Not SVG, orphaned, no foreseeable use as there are no other platform icons I am aware of. — Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 23:26, 8 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.