Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2015 October 17

< October 16	October 18 >

October 17[edit]

Several files uploaded by User:Bedford[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: The consensus, per policy, is to delete the unused files per WP:NOTWEBHOST. As for the used files, the original uploader of the files has given no good reason for local copies to be kept. Simply wanting them for notification purposes could arguably falls under WP:NOTWEBHOST. The discussion below points out that the Commons copies are of more use as the descriptions are updated and include links to appropriate pages. The consensus of the discussion below is to delete all of the listed files. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 17:31, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unused files[edit]

Files in use[edit]

Comments[edit]

NowCommons; KeepLocal means F8 ineligible but user is inactive. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 03:57, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP I want to have a warning before someone who clearly needs to compensate for certain..deficiencies...tries to delete all my hard work. I don't follow commons, so I have no warning. Please get a life, and stop spamming my emails with all your silly deletion requests.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 07:46, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unused file, delete per WP:NOTWEBHOST. Kelly ^hi! 09:17, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have merged several discussions about files uploaded by User:Bedford because the requests essentially are identical and people just repeated the same arguments or pointed at the first request in the list. I assume that the outcome of the discussion should be the same for all of the files in the set and this seems to be a better way to discuss the files. User:Bedford, are you aware that you can set up your Commons watchlist so that you get an e-mail whenever a page on the list is changed? --Stefan2 (talk) 14:38, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
My comment above only applies to those of the files that are not used on en Wikipedia. Also, the uploader's last comment on his talk page indicates he doesn't intend to be active here. If that's the case, I'm not sure why he wants to keep local copies. He also says he wants to have a warning, but he doesn't want to be "spammed" with notifications, which seems contradictory. Not sure how to respect both wishes. Kelly ^hi! 14:41, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, User:Kelly, I didn't notice that there was a mixture of used and unused pictures in this set and that you only had commented on the unused ones. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:10, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Kelly and Stefan2: if one of you is around, could I ask you a huge favor? Add to this discussion the other files marked by Kelly and Ogrebot (see Special:Contributions/OgreBot). I didn't have time to get them last night, and I don't today.
Also, Bedford in one breath complains when his files are marked for deletion and yet wants them to stay here so that he can get notifications about them. Hmm. Couples with the unnecessary personal attacks, I have legitimate reason to wonder if his reason for keeping the files locally is rational. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 15:36, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Another point is that the file descriptions have been updated and maintained on Commons, but not on the local copies. For instance, the Commons versions have identifying information regarding National Historic Landmarks and the National Register of Historic Places, links to other images of the same place, links to information at the National Park Service, and in many cases geolocation information. The local pages have none of this, just a bare one-line description. I would think we would want page visitors and content re-users to land on the Commons pages when they click on a particular image, not the local version. Kelly ^hi! 07:19, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think that the outcome should depend on the uploader's reason for wishing to keeping the files locally and whether someone is willing to keep the file information pages up-to-date. If the uploader isn't willing to keep the file information pages up-to-date, we should not expect anyone else to do this either, and it is not a good idea to present outdated or limited information, so if the files are likely to remain outdated for a long time, we'd better delete them and point people to the up-to-date copies on Commons instead. If the uploader tries to watch files and pages using the files, this may be an acceptable reason for keeping the files (but first consider the problem with outdated information). However, on his talk page, the uploader revelas that he has 'decided to stop slumming at Wikipedia', which suggests that he no longer follows his watchlist and that the reason for keeping the files is not for the purpose of watching them. This makes it look more like an attempt to use Wikipedia as a personal webhost, which is not permitted under policy. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:38, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would like to see if these files could be included in existing articles, even if in galleries. There may be some very useful ones in this big batch. It might take me a few days to go through them all, though. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 21:31, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Stevietheman - the unused files are all available on Commons, many have just ended up with different file names for various reasons, though some have the same names and are simply unused. In any case, the Commons versions have had their file description pages cleaned up and improved, so I believe this is what we would want our page visitors to see without being masked by old file description pages that haven't been maintained. Kelly ^hi! 21:37, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks for the explain and for lightening my load. :) I guess if Bedford can't come up with a reason for having local versions, I see no reason to keep them. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 21:41, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural comment Although this is the discussion page for 17 October 2015, some of the files were added to the request on later dates, the latest ones on 20 October I think. An FFD nomination should normally be open for at least seven days. I guess that the nomination should be open at least until seven days after the last addition of a file to this request. --Stefan2 (talk) 23:53, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not a webhost. The images are on Commons. I like doors (talk) 19:49, 28 October 2015 (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:The Lost Planet.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 ⚡ 04:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The cover of the "First Light Series" reissue of ELO 2 is no longer necessary. There is already the original UK album cover, and deleting the "First Light Series" image is no big loss. George Ho (talk) 05:23, 17 October 2015 (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:Sacramento Deep Water Ship Channel map 2010.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 ⚡ 04:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot locate this image on army.mil or any other federal government website. Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:09, 17 October 2015 (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:Port of Sacramento map.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 ⚡ 04:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

i can't locate this image at any .gov website. Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:11, 17 October 2015 (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:Madhesipeople.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 ⚡ 04:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not a work of the US government as far as I can tell. Eeekster (talk) 09:01, 17 October 2015 (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:Soprano Clef - trimmed.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 as F8 by Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 19:12, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate for Commons, local is larger. (should be SVG really) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:22, 17 October 2015 (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:Torres Straits 1898.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) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate for Commons, Local larger. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:23, 17 October 2015 (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:Old logo.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) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8: former logo. Stefan2 (talk) 10:46, 17 October 2015 (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:Compton Wynyates.gif[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 ⚡ 04:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unused file, inadequate information to determine licensing status. Kelly ^hi! 14:21, 17 October 2015 (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:Nell Gwyn.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 ⚡ 04:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Low-resolution version of File:Possibly Nell Gwyn by Sir Peter Lely.jpg. Kelly ^hi! 14:26, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. Bishonen | talk 14:28, 17 October 2015 (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:Cienaga2.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 ⚡ 04:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Although there is a template cc-by-2.0, in the description is a statement "for wikipedia and sibling projects only", what is in conflict with CC BY 2.0 and Wikipedia's policy about free usage. KuboF (talk) 14:31, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

After decision, please inform Esperanto Wikipedia at eo:Dosiero:800px-Cienaga2.png. Thanks! --KuboF (talk) 14:35, 17 October 2015 (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:Parallax.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 ⚡ 04:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, no foreseeable use. Stefan2 (talk) 15:46, 17 October 2015 (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:Retrato2.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) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, unidentified person, possibly a userphoto. No foreseeable use. Stefan2 (talk) 15:47, 17 October 2015 (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:DontYouForgetAboutMe.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 ⚡ 04:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Scottish (part of UK) work was first featured in the American film, and, despite the song's fame throughout the work, if the Scottish new waves band created the song, then we might consider the pop song Scottish (pop). This image is of American single, and we already have the international image. I don't think this image is necessary anymore, but some would disagree, like the uploader here. George Ho (talk) 19:57, 17 October 2015 (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:Golden Artist Colors Logo.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 ⚡ 04:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Obsolete Bod (talk) 23:26, 17 October 2015 (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:Pak-China Friendship Centre.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 ⚡ 04:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent (Facebook) resolution, missing EXIF, per c:COM:PRP, considering User talk:Wanishahrukh Gunnex (talk) 23:31, 17 October 2015 (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:Khadija Mushtaq.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 ⚡ 04:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent (Facebook) resolution, missing EXIF, per c:COM:PRP, considering User talk:Wanishahrukh Gunnex (talk) 23:45, 17 October 2015 (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.