Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 September 4

< September 3	September 5 >

September 4

File:Pregnancy 26 weeks.jpg

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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons. Please nominate it for deletion there if you still feel it should be deleted. AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This file is only used on two pages - Pregnancy (mammals) and Pregnancy - it is inappropriate for the former page, and easily replaced on the latter (there is an ongoing RfC on this matter. Further, the licensing of the file is disputable: it was originally released as CC, which the author later retracted. WHile it is technically legitimate to continue using it under CC rules, it would be better to respect the author's wishes in this matter. Ludwigs2 00:41, 4 September 2011 (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:Sheikh Mujib Racecourse.jpg

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 ⚡ 05:03, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader is unlikely to be the author. Copyright claim not credible. Image widely available on the net (http://www.caravanmagazine.in/Story.aspx?Storyid=213&StoryStyle=FullStory) Uploader multiple copyright offender (see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ARossi101&action=historysubmit&diff=447447280&oldid=446912947). Elekhh (talk) 01:12, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete: Blatant copyvio. The uploader is simply lying about the copyright. The uploader has previous history of violating copyright of images and content. I suggest speedy deletion of the photo since it's a blatant copyvio. --Ragib (talk) 05:58, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I suspect many more of the uploads of this user are copyvios. I have no time to pursue this further, but it would be good if somebody would check these. It is also worrying that despite multiple warnings the user continues to upload images without proper attribution and/or fair use rationale. --Elekhh (talk) 03:53, 7 September 2011 (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:Algoma, Oregon.PNG

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 ⚡ 05:03, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, low quality; better map used in infobox of Algoma, Oregon article Jsayre64 (talk) 02:32, 4 September 2011 (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:Jfeinbergcolorsjpg.jpg

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 ⚡ 05:03, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, unencyclopedic Acather96 (talk) 06:51, 4 September 2011 (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:Jason Feinberg Photos246.jpg

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 ⚡ 05:03, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, unencyclopedic due to subjects been unidentified Acather96 (talk) 06:51, 4 September 2011 (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:Delhi Police.png

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 ⚡ 05:03, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Photo of a vehicle, a free license photo could easily be obtained, thus this fails NFCC 1. Acather96 (talk) 07:31, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Agree with nominator, image fails WP:NFCC, as it is replaceable. Sir Armbrust ^{Talk to me} _Contribs 09:04, 5 September 2011 (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:Production of oil shale.PNG

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 ⚡ 05:03, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OB. Identical SVG file exists in Commons. Also, updated PNG file is uploaded to Commons. Beagel (talk) 09:53, 4 September 2011 (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:Bianor.jpg

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 ⚡ 05:03, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unusably low quality. Sven Manguard Wha? 15:12, 4 September 2011 (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:Alexipharmic.jpg

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 ⚡ 05:03, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Low quality orphan image without description. Robert Weemeyer (talk) 15:55, 4 September 2011 (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:Waste Management logo.svg

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 ⚡ 05:03, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned to another identical logo. Sven Manguard Wha? 16:09, 4 September 2011 (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:UnderworldEvolutionSS.png

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 ⚡ 02:04, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Picture fails the non-free content criteria, as it is only used for illustration and doesn't enhance the understanding of the topic and article doesn't contain critical commentary about it. Sir Armbrust ^{Talk to me} _Contribs 19:52, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be sufficient to say the image demonstrates the blue-hued and dark style of the footage (we could add commentary on the blue-hue to the article), as well as Michael embracing the powers he has developed over the films? Some guy (talk) 00:46, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If it is referenced with reliable sources, than yes. Sir Armbrust ^{Talk to me} _Contribs 08:57, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For now I have added two reviewers who criticized the film's blue tint; one of them opened his review with the blue tint. Some guy (talk) 22:51, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently that wasn't good enough. Thanks for letting me know before deleting it. Some guy (talk) 01:08, 12 September 2011 (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.