Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 September 2

< September 1	September 3 >

September 2[edit]

File:Portraits of SS officers.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. Big Dom 06:55, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unused; comprised of several photographs that aren't sourced. Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:18, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Inadequately sourced. Jay32183 (talk) 23:09, 8 September 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:EugenOtt.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; the source information of the image is inadequate. Big Dom 06:58, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See #File:Portraits of SS officers.jpg. Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:19, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Still in use, did you even check the article?--Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 02:56, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This one is still in use (the above one isn't), but the sourcing is still too poor to allow as is unless it's fixed. Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:43, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Inadequately sourced. The only source given is another Wikipedia image, that isn't properly sourced. Jay32183 (talk) 23:11, 8 September 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:Georgeeastfinchley.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 ⚡ 12:07, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, description is vague and not enough to establish PD license. Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:27, 2 September 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:Gerald2.JPG.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 ⚡ 13:07, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Superseded by File:Gerald Graham 1806.png Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:31, 2 September 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:Napoleon III, Emperor of the French.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:04, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deformed version of File:Franz Xaver Winterhalter Napoleon III.jpg. —Srnec (talk) 03:52, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- There are more like these by the same user, but I haven't the time to waste nominating them. Srnec (talk) 03:53, 2 September 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:Gits-tiltrotor.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 Angusmclellan (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:07, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan. Was being used in the Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex article, but has been orphaned because the section it was in (Technology, under Production) has been removed due to original research and redundant information. BloodDoll (talk) 05:31, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the file is in any case, misnamed, it is a tiltwing, not a tiltrotor. 76.66.194.106 (talk) 06:09, 3 September 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:Intensity as the light travels.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

can be replaced by $I (z) / I (0) = exp[-2 ω kz/c]$ Skier Dude (talk 05:32, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: there are lots of similar files showing mathematical formulae, they are not doing any harm and are much clearer than the alternative you have provided. Big Dom 13:45, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a vector version, if that helps... File:Intensity as the light travels.svg Begoontalk 16:18, 9 September 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:Ph gag2.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 ⚡ 01:01, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, Better quality version (slightly different tinting): File:Wanda Gag 1.jpg. Magog the Ogre (talk) 11:21, 2 September 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:Empire of Japan in 1943.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, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned map, Low Quality, no foreseeable use. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 17:04, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support deletion as superceded, I wish someone had found some of my old squeakers before they got moved to Commons!--Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 17:30, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above reasons Begoontalk 09:42, 3 September 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:Greater German Reich in 1942.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) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned map, Low Quality, no foreseeable use. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 17:04, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Move to commons its license is compatible. If there were no forseeable use, why is it that four different users have updated the map? 76.66.194.106 (talk) 06:07, 3 September 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:Großdeutsches Reich.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) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned map, Low Quality, no foreseeable use. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 17:05, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Move to commons its license is compatible; Someone will need to explain to me how "(1,837 × 1,655 pixels)" is low quality. 76.66.194.106 (talk) 06:05, 3 September 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:British Empire in 1921.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) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned map, Low Quality, no foreseeable use. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 17:05, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Waitaminnit, this one is only a month old, is there a reason all these requests are about a single uploader?--Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 17:33, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Move to commons Can someone explain why Fastily say's it's low quality? How is "(1,357 × 628 pixels)" low quality ? It's license is compatible, so move it to commons. 76.66.194.106 (talk) 06:02, 3 September 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:First French Empire (1804-1815).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) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned map, Low Quality, no foreseeable use. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 17:05, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Move to commons its license is compatible. 76.66.194.106 (talk) 06:03, 3 September 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:Imperial Standard of Napoleon I.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 ⚡ 02:01, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Low Quality, obsoleted by svg version, no foreseeable use. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 17:05, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per above reasons Begoontalk 09:46, 3 September 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:Papadopoulos33.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, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Studio style/PR photo of a notable individual. Likely copyrighted. No reason given to suggest that uploader is copyright holder. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 17:19, 2 September 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:Empty Tomb at Resthaven Memorial Park, Lubbock, TX IMG 0020.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, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This picture does not in any serious fashion represent the subject in question. It does however look very much how the tomb was depicted in mid to late 20th century American Christian art and illustration. Wlmg (talk) 22:48, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
deleted pic from article Empty tomb withdraw nomination for deletion provided the pic only links to Kevin O'Brien (Texas pastor) Wlmg (talk) 23:09, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Depending on when the replica was made, and if it is considered artwork or a building, this file may be deletable under FoP.--Rockfang (talk) 06:36, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The tomb feature was completed in 1993 and according to this cite here.Wlmg (talk) 12:07, 5 September 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:96th Street's Side Platforms.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, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image is too dark and tiny to see anything The Legendary Ranger (talk) 23:55, 2 September 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:7th Avenue's Closed Staircases.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, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image is too dark, blurry, and tiny to see anything The Legendary Ranger (talk) 23:55, 2 September 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.