Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 September 5

< September 4	September 6 >

September 5[edit]

File:Techno Cumbia (1995).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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Violates points three and eight of WP:NFCC. This cover is not significantly different from the main cover to justify its use, nor would its removal be detrimental to the understanding of the article. — ξ ^xplicit 00:26, 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:Abba stamp.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Non-free postage stamp image used in the article about the subject of the article ABBA: The Tour not about the stamp clearly fails WP:NFC#Images #3 without any critical commentary about the stamp itself. More importantly it fails WP:NFCC#8 because the use a this non-free stamp is unnecessary for the readers' understanding of the article and the fact that the Swedish Post Office produced a stamp to honour the subject of the stamp is already explained in the prose. ww2censor (talk) 03:25, 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:Kaohsiung City seal.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Logo (presumed non-free) not used in any articles. Sven Manguard Wha? 03:31, 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:K-8E stamp.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Egyptian postage stamp image, which according to commons:COM:L#Egypt appears to be copyright for 25 years, is not used in the article about the stamp but in Arab Organization for Industrialization clearly fails WP:NFC#Images #3 without any critical commentary about the stamp itself. The image caption does mention that the logo is shown on the stamp but that logo already has itsown image in the article and a free image of the aircraft could probably be found. More importantly it fails WP:NFCC#8 because the use a this non-free stamp is unnecessary for the readers' understanding of the article and the fact that the Egyptian Post Office produced a stamp to honour the subject of the stamp could easily be explained by prose. ww2censor (talk) 03:36, 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:Maurice27 flag.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Seems to be a personal flag. No encyclopedic use. —Bkell (talk) 05:41, 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:WKU Helmet 2011.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:06, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute Logo Fair use claim, this is not the logo (see File:WesternKentuckyHilltoppers.png) but is a copyright image of the helmet. Mt king ^(edits) 05:48, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Its also from a website where the creater gives permission to use his work and there are a ton of teams pages that already have helmet images up from his site. I don't see why this can't be used when so many others are already being used.Bsuorangecrush (talk) 05:52, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think the nominators problem with the file is that it uses the incorrect copyright tag and non-free rationale. If these are changed than keep, otherwise delete. Sir Armbrust ^{Talk to me} _Contribs 09:11, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think a FUR can be made for the helmet's use given the article has the logo and the website that it is taken from clearly states All site content copyright 1999-2011 Charles Arey. So unless permission is given from the website it should be deleted. Mt king ^(edits) 09:21, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. If you go to the "source" link on the file description page and scroll down to near the bottom, it says very clearly that images taken from that website may not be re-used for commercial purposes. Therefore, we must assume that WP:NFCC#2 is failed. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:31, 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:SIAM POSTER.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:06, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Photo of a car, the article already contains plenty free license photos of this car, and this is non-free. In no way does this meet the NFCC, as not only is this replaceable, its use is purely decorative. Acather96 (talk) 09:52, 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:Ferrari-612-Scaglietti-MagicIndiaDiscoveryDrive.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:06, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fails the non-free content criteria as it is most probably replaceable (it's a picture of Ferrari's in India) and the image itself is not the subject of critical commentary itself, nor does it aid the readers understanding of the topic. It's use in Ferrari is purely decorative. Acather96 (talk) 09:54, 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:Fin Flash Arma Aerea 2.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:06, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, unencyclopedic Acather96 (talk) 09:58, 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:Belgaum Karnataka Police.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:06, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Photo of a van, fails NFCC 1 as this is easily replacable. Also fails 10c due to lack of a decent FUR. Acather96 (talk) 10:01, 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:Tata Daewoo.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:06, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Photo of a vehicle, fails NFCC 1 as it is easily replaceable, and it's use is in both instances decorative. Lacks a decent FUR, so also fails 10c. Acather96 (talk) 10:02, 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:Bernardo Tata Hispano.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:06, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Photograph of a bus, easily replacable. Use in Tata Hispano is purely decorative, article contains loads of other free license photographs and this is not the subject of any sort of critical commentary. Also lacks a decent FUR, so fails criterion 1, 8 and 10c. Acather96 (talk) 10:07, 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:ParisandBond.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:06, 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. There is also a free image, which could be used for the same purpose (File:PierceBrosnan(CannesPhotoCall).jpg). Thus the image fails WP:NFCC #1 & 8. Sir Armbrust ^{Talk to me} _Contribs 10:11, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, that's true, fails NFCC. – Quadell ^(talk) 12:15, 8 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:K7 main screen.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:06, 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 10:13, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, but doesn't it illustrate the previous version of K7? Rishabh Tatiraju (talk) 10:31, 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:Khmer Empire Flag(unofficial).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. SchuminWeb (Talk) 07:01, 12 September 2011 (UTC) It seems that this is an pure fictional flag: No source, deriavative work of today's flag for a medival country in asia--Antemister (talk) 11:35, 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:Baker wetlands jsain-baird.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 Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:39, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Deleted for privacy reasons. The new image is at File:Baker wetlands 2.jpg. – Quadell ^(talk) 12:51, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded this photo and gave copyright permission. I would like to no longer have this photo on Wikipedia or any Wikipedia page. Sprout and the Bean (talk) 15:02, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Sprout, please read Wikipedia:Revocation of our licensing is not permitted. A Creative Commons license, such as the one under which you licensed this image, cannot be revoked. By licensing this photograph under a Creative Commons license, you have voluntarily agreed to allow anyone to use it for any purpose; you have relinquished your control over how it is used. —Bkell (talk) 19:37, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to change the file name of the photo to not have the name included? Thank you. —Sprout and the Bean — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.248.88.95 (talk) 15:06, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and if it's a privacy issue, that's entirely appropriate. The quickest way is to upload, again, the same image, but use a new file name that satisfies your concern. Then, you can put {{Db-f1|new file name}} at the top of the file description page for the old file, and it will get speedily deleted. You also have to put the new file name on the pages where the image is used. You can do this as soon as you wish. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:54, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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:Kystlink 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; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:06, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned to an SVG. PD-textlogo does not require this file be kept for attribution purposes, and the SVG does not appear to be a derivative of this file anyways. Sven Manguard Wha? 16:12, 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:Daisy bunch2.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 ⚡ 01:06, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Likely copyright violation; contains a watermark that says "© BJ WebArt". —Bkell (talk) 16:32, 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:Methalol.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 ⚡ 01:06, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unused image, uploaded by a vandalism-only account. No encyclopedic use. —Bkell (talk) 17:13, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Methalol. —Bkell (talk) 17:14, 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:DWSunCe.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 ⚡ 01:06, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

These are all non-free images that fail WP:NFCC#8. They are promotional artwork for a video game, used in articles about various historical people (Sun Ce, Zhang He, and so on) who happen to be represented as characters in that video game. These images do not increase readers' understanding of the historical people, who are the topic of their respective articles. —Bkell (talk) 18:20, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all. NFCC#8 vio. – Quadell ^(talk) 12:48, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all I happen to me a fan of the series, but I agree with the rationale. I'd also note that pretty much all of the images are not historically active by a long shot, so their encyclopedic value is low. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:04, 9 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:RuthBenedict.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:06, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned version of File:Ruth Benedict.jpg. Kelly ^hi! 17:48, 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:Gregarmandoroaster.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 ⚡ 01:06, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unused photographs of two men, likely intended by the uploader for an article about a coffee company which was repeatedly deleted for lack of notability. No foreseeable encyclopedic use. —Bkell (talk) 19:47, 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:Harry M. Daugherty.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 ⚡ 01:06, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned low-res version of File:Harry Daugherty, bw photo portrait 1920.jpg. Kelly ^hi! 20:09, 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:Jpeg).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 ⚡ 01:06, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, low-resolution personal image. No encyclopedic use. —Bkell (talk) 20:23, 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:Rat terrier.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 ⚡ 01:06, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Photographic images should almost always be in JPEG format, which File:Rat terrier.jpg. No need for a PNG duplicate of a photo. –Drilnoth (T/C) 21:28, 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:StHelenaEarwigStamp.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 ⚡ 01:06, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Non-free postage stamp image used in the article about the subject of the article Saint Helena earwig not about the stamp image clearly fails WP:NFC#Images #3 especially without any critical commentary about the stamp itself. More importantly it fails WP:NFCC#8 because the use a this non-free stamp is unnecessary for the readers' understanding of the article and the fact that the St Helena Post Office produced a stamp to illustrat the subject of the stamp is already explained in the prose. It should be possible to make a free photo of the earwig ti illustrate the article. ww2censor (talk) 22:06, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There is commentary about the stamp: "On January 4, 1982, the Saint Helena Philatelic Bureau issued a commemorative stamp depicting the earwig, which brought attention to its conservation.[5]". InverseHypercube 22:16, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That prose is not critical commentary about the stamp, it just states that the stamp was issued. That is already stated in the prose and the use of a non-free stamp image is unnecessary for the reader to understand that statement per WP:NFCC#8. How can that be claimed to be critical commentary? ww2censor (talk) 14:43, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, clear NFCC violation. – Quadell ^(talk) 12:39, 8 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:Dharmaraja- Kingswood 100th Cricket Match Commemoration Stamp.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 ⚡ 01:06, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Non-free postage stamp image used in the article about the subject of the article Dharmaraja–Kingswood Cricket Encounter not about the stamp image clearly fails WP:NFC#Images #3 without any critical commentary about the stamp itself. More importantly it fails WP:NFCC#8 because the use a this non-free stamp is unnecessary for the readers' understanding of the article and the fact that the Sri Lankan Post Office produced a stamp to honour the subject of the stamp could easily be explained in prose. ww2censor (talk) 22:24, 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.