Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 December 13

< December 12	December 14 >

December 13[edit]

File:Pjcameo.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 ⚡ 03:02, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This non-free media does not meet WP:NFCC#8. Although it increases understanding some, it is hardly necessary or significant. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:34, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This is a class of image that I would like to see a speedy delete category for. No montage of multiple copyrighted screenshots can possibly constitute minimal use: each image should be separate and live or die on its own merits.—Kww(talk) 20:23, 19 December 2012 (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:Sulimov dog.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. Per nominator and sole voter, clearly replaceable.—Kww(talk) 20:30, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Though there is no doubt that this is an extremely rare breed of dog, I think it is an exaggeration to say that no free image could be created. The breed is currently extant, and is used as a working dog in public areas (at airports) so it should be possible for a free image to be taken. Furthermore, an internet search reveals several images that at least claim to be of Sulimov dogs, though some of those look dubious to me. Chick Bowen 03:04, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:14, 13 December 2012 (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:Rocket-Cheetah-Logo.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 as G7, author request. Chick Bowen 16:36, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded this file to use on my user page but it's no longer needed. (I probably shouldn't have uploaded it in the first place as it has no encyclopedic use) Chimpanzee ^{Us | Ta | Co} 12:36, 13 December 2012 (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:Mannequin Akash Soukhee.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 as F9 by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:05, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Has watermark clearly stating that it is a copyrighted image. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 19:05, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete as F9. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:14, 13 December 2012 (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:Coachs Daughter.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 as G7 by RHaworth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 19:09, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free TV episode screenshot, used in infobox. Shows a scene that can easily be described and understood through words alone (two characters hug, their faces invisible). Nothing further in the text hinges on any visual detail of the image shown. Not otherwise embedded in critical commentary. Fails NFCC#8. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:30, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've replaced this version with two faces visible and no hugs. What do you think? --George Ho (talk) 22:43, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's just two talking heads. Same situation for me. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:25, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I told George Ho that the image could be uploaded because it serves the same purpose as music video screenshots, which meets NFCC#8. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 13:31, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't know what kind of music video screenshots you were thinking of, but if you meant to imply that there is some kind of blanket allowance, you were mistaken. It is a constantly upheld consensus, reaffirmed by innumerable precedents at FFD, that TV screenshots can only be used on a case-by-case basis, if and when they are individually justified by a substantial need to make some particular piece of analytic discussion in the text understood. The same is also true for music video screenshots, although I'll readily believe that this is often abused in practice, so some people might be misled into thinking there is a blanket allowance. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:36, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Well, now that I think of it, you're correct. I just thought it was a "standard" to some types of articles and forgot about NFCC#8. Actually, I was talking about a common thing I see when reviewing good article nominations. When I work on music articles, I try to use as fewer non-free images as possible, and music video screenshots is one of those I avoid, although I started to think, a while ago, that they were allowed. But, as you say, its use may be abused in practice, misleading people into believing there is a blanket allowance. Finally, I still have to completely understand the non-free criteria for images like these; I find the images policy a bit confusing sometimes. Regards. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 15:20, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I always knew that this still image and other version fail to help readers. Even an image of two mere people still standing or hugging is irrelevant. I've tagged this image with db-g7. --George Ho (talk) 15:59, 14 December 2012 (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:ABCD000611.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: speedy delete under F8, available on Commons as File:Berceni, Bucharest - Luica Street.jpg. — ξ ^xplicit 01:30, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In spite of its high number of pixels the image is of kinda low quality, and the subject matter is unidentified. Dianna (talk) 23:10, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Apparently it's a street view of Berceni, Bucharest [1]. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:54, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've asked at the uploader's talk page. -- Dianna (talk) 00:10, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]