Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2014 October 7

< October 6	October 8 >

October 7[edit]

File:Woodrow Stanley Lloyd.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFLISTS and WP:NFCC#9. Stefan2 (talk) 00:00, 7 October 2014 (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:Scene from Twin Peaks Pilot - Discovery of the body of Laura Palmer.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8 by being used for decorative rather than informative purposes: these images must be discussed critically and greatly enhance the text. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:44, 7 October 2014 (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:Pilot (Twin Peaks).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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8 by being used for decorative rather than informative purposes: these images must be discussed critically and greatly enhance the text. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:44, 7 October 2014 (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:Book hover.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned screencap. Kelly ^hi! 07:26, 7 October 2014 (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:216BARNSTAR.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned barnstar. Kelly ^hi! 07:36, 7 October 2014 (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:I fought the gate, and the gate won.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Userpage image for long-absent user. Kelly ^hi! 07:43, 7 October 2014 (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:Iarthair Chorcaí 027.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, no description or context. Kelly ^hi! 07:47, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Additionally, the source information was not added by the uploader but by User:Sfan00 IMG, who didn't specify where the source information comes from. --Stefan2 (talk) 12:48, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the location is Dursey Island and a better view of the same sign is here. Cramyourspam (talk) 21:21, 7 October 2014 (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:Iarthair Chorcaí 117.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, low resolution. Kelly ^hi! 07:48, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What is User:Sfan00 IMG's source for the source information he added in 2012? --Stefan2 (talk) 12:54, 7 October 2014 (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:ICMMap.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 as F11 by Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:11, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned map. Kelly ^hi! 07:49, 7 October 2014 (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:Ico learn violin40x40.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, low resolution. Kelly ^hi! 07:49, 7 October 2014 (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:Icon Christ.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, no description or context. Kelly ^hi! 07:50, 7 October 2014 (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:IdolFret01.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, unencyclopedic. Kelly ^hi! 08:24, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Per WP:UNENCYCLOPEDIC, "unencyclopedic" is an empty argument and is to be avoided in deletion discussions. Does this image violate any actual guidelines? - Dravecky (talk) 06:21, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- According to Wikipedia:Files for deletion/heading, "unencyclopædic" is an example of a common reason for a file to be deleted and therefore has to be assumed to be a valid reason for deletion. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:05, 9 October 2014 (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:IFClogo.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned logo. Kelly ^hi! 08:26, 7 October 2014 (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:Ihor Podolchak Print 3.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, unencyclopedic. Kelly ^hi! 08:29, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is in use (but also with {{orphan image}}). --Stefan2 (talk) 12:56, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Per WP:UNENCYCLOPEDIC, "unencyclopedic" is an empty argument and is to be avoided in deletion discussions. Does this image violate any actual guidelines? - Dravecky (talk) 06:20, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- According to Wikipedia:Files for deletion/heading, "unencyclopædic" is an example of a common reason for a file to be deleted and therefore has to be assumed to be a valid reason for deletion. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:05, 9 October 2014 (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:Ihor Podolchak Print 4.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, unencyclopedic. Kelly ^hi! 08:29, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Per WP:UNENCYCLOPEDIC, "unencyclopedic" is an empty argument and is to be avoided in deletion discussions. Does this image violate any actual guidelines? - Dravecky (talk) 06:21, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- According to Wikipedia:Files for deletion/heading, "unencyclopædic" is an example of a common reason for a file to be deleted and therefore has to be assumed to be a valid reason for deletion. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:05, 9 October 2014 (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:Ilaha.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, unencyclopedic. Kelly ^hi! 08:38, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Per WP:UNENCYCLOPEDIC, "unencyclopedic" is an empty argument and is to be avoided in deletion discussions. Does this image violate any actual guidelines? - Dravecky (talk) 06:22, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- According to Wikipedia:Files for deletion/heading, "unencyclopædic" is an example of a common reason for a file to be deleted and therefore has to be assumed to be a valid reason for deletion. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:05, 9 October 2014 (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:IllyRap Wht.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 Ronhjones (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 23:00, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, unencyclopedic. Kelly ^hi! 08:45, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Per WP:UNENCYCLOPEDIC, "unencyclopedic" is an empty argument and is to be avoided in deletion discussions. Does this image violate any actual guidelines? - Dravecky (talk) 06:22, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- According to Wikipedia:Files for deletion/heading, "unencyclopædic" is an example of a common reason for a file to be deleted and therefore has to be assumed to be a valid reason for deletion. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:05, 9 October 2014 (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:Imag0001.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, unencyclopedic. Kelly ^hi! 08:47, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Per WP:UNENCYCLOPEDIC, "unencyclopedic" is an empty argument and is to be avoided in deletion discussions. Does this image violate any actual guidelines? - Dravecky (talk) 06:23, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- According to Wikipedia:Files for deletion/heading, "unencyclopædic" is an example of a common reason for a file to be deleted and therefore has to be assumed to be a valid reason for deletion. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:05, 9 October 2014 (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:Image-Aesclapius Vet.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned derivative work. Kelly ^hi! 08:52, 7 October 2014 (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:Image-GoldLetterW.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, unencyclopedic. Kelly ^hi! 08:54, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Per WP:UNENCYCLOPEDIC, "unencyclopedic" is an empty argument and is to be avoided in deletion discussions. Does this image violate any actual guidelines? - Dravecky (talk) 06:23, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- According to Wikipedia:Files for deletion/heading, "unencyclopædic" is an example of a common reason for a file to be deleted and therefore has to be assumed to be a valid reason for deletion. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:06, 9 October 2014 (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:Image234.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, low resolution. Kelly ^hi! 08:59, 7 October 2014 (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:Imagecomingsoon.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, unencyclopedic. Kelly ^hi! 09:01, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Per WP:UNENCYCLOPEDIC, "unencyclopedic" is an empty argument and is to be avoided in deletion discussions. Does this image violate any actual guidelines? - Dravecky (talk) 06:23, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- According to Wikipedia:Files for deletion/heading, "unencyclopædic" is an example of a common reason for a file to be deleted and therefore has to be assumed to be a valid reason for deletion. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:06, 9 October 2014 (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:Inside of a Canadian Passport.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 Ronhjones (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 23:00, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, possibly non-free. Kelly ^hi! 10:13, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Question: are publications of the Canadian government in the public domain like US Federal government publications? Is so, the uploader noted during upload that this is "Inside of a Canadian Passport. My passport." and the exif data attached to the image so closely matches the upload time that the assertion by the uploader that it is their own photograph should be sufficient, especially as this was uploaded in 2006 before more automated processes were in place. - Dravecky (talk) 06:17, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Works by the Canadian government are copyrighted for 50 years from publication (or perpetually if never published). We are missing evidence that the Canadian government published these passport pages more than 50 years ago. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:07, 9 October 2014 (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:InsideCovancebyPETA.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned local file that uploader has requested not be moved to Commons. Should be either used in an article or deleted per WP:NOTREPOSITORY. Kelly ^hi! 10:16, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The fact that a free file is orphaned is not in itself a reason for deletion from WP. Regarding WP:NOTREPOSITORY, this image is not remotely of the type of PD material described in section (3). Section (4) refers to images with no accompanying text. In this case the image has accompanying text that provides encyclopedic context. So far as I can see the uploader has expressed no objection to the image being added to Commons (but anyway the policy only suggests this for images with no accompanying text). This nomination does not seem to be based on any policy or guideline. Thincat (talk) 00:07, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete See Wikipedia:Files for deletion/heading, which lists some common reasons for deletion:
1. "Orphan": The image is not currently in use.
2. "Unencyclopedic": The image is of so low quality that it is unlikely to serve any encyclopædic purposes.
3. "Low quality": This is indeed low quality and very blurry. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:11, 9 October 2014 (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:Insurance Building.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Licensing terms on source website prohibit derivative works. Kelly ^hi! 10:26, 7 October 2014 (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:Intel BiCMOS OR Gate.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 F11 by Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:11, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, no evidence of permission. Kelly ^hi! 10:31, 7 October 2014 (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:Da bull.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, no description or context. Kelly ^hi! 11:50, 7 October 2014 (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:Da Fluten.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, unencyclopedic. Kelly ^hi! 11:50, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Per WP:UNENCYCLOPEDIC, "unencyclopedic" is an empty argument and is to be avoided in deletion discussions. Does this image violate any actual guidelines? - Dravecky (talk) 06:23, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- According to Wikipedia:Files for deletion/heading, "unencyclopædic" is an example of a common reason for a file to be deleted and therefore has to be assumed to be a valid reason for deletion. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:08, 9 October 2014 (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:Dandeli.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, low resolution. Kelly ^hi! 12:04, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Although it says that the photograph was taken using the uploader's phone, we do not know who the photographer was. --Stefan2 (talk) 12:59, 7 October 2014 (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:Dark.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 DragonflySixtyseven (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, unencyclopedic. Kelly ^hi! 12:13, 7 October 2014 (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:Darood Awaisya.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, unencyclopedic. Kelly ^hi! 12:15, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Per WP:UNENCYCLOPEDIC, "unencyclopedic" is an empty argument and is to be avoided in deletion discussions. Does this image violate any actual guidelines? - Dravecky (talk) 06:24, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- According to Wikipedia:Files for deletion/heading, "unencyclopædic" is an example of a common reason for a file to be deleted and therefore has to be assumed to be a valid reason for deletion. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:08, 9 October 2014 (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:Data Environment Architecture.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned diagram. Kelly ^hi! 12:20, 7 October 2014 (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:Data folketaelling FT1787 01710 00271.tif[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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, likely no encyclopedic use. Kelly ^hi! 12:21, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Per WP:UNENCYCLOPEDIC, "unencyclopedic" is an empty argument and is to be avoided in deletion discussions. Does this image violate any actual guidelines? - Dravecky (talk) 06:24, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- According to Wikipedia:Files for deletion/heading, "unencyclopædic" is an example of a common reason for a file to be deleted and therefore has to be assumed to be a valid reason for deletion. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:08, 9 October 2014 (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:David Brin2.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned derivative work. Kelly ^hi! 12:34, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Original source at Commons deleted for lacking evidence of permission. Kelly ^hi! 06:36, 16 October 2014 (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:DavidMeiselAdidas.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 Ronhjones (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 23:00, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, unencyclopedic. Kelly ^hi! 12:54, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Per WP:UNENCYCLOPEDIC, "unencyclopedic" is an empty argument and is to be avoided in deletion discussions. Does this image violate any actual guidelines? - Dravecky (talk) 06:24, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- According to Wikipedia:Files for deletion/heading, "unencyclopædic" is an example of a common reason for a file to be deleted and therefore has to be assumed to be a valid reason for deletion. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:09, 9 October 2014 (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:Ray Bradbury watching a video.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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8: not critically discussed. Stefan2 (talk) 14:54, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken. I've added a section to the article which discusses Bradbury's reaction to the video; the image now serves to illustrate that section. Good enough? DS (talk) 15:44, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NFCI. It is nice to see Bradbury's response now reported in the article body, but the non-free image does not add anything of value. The original filename said that Bradbury was in shock, now the context is saying he was charmed? This is too much of an effort to make a connection; a non-free image's use and suitability should be immediately apparent when it comes to this free encyclopedia. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 15:58, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- It originally said "in shock", but no longer does; I got that wrong when I uploaded it. Now it just says "watching". DS (talk) 16:31, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Even with the coverage in the article, I still think this fails at least WP:NFCC#3b and WP:NFCC#8, as the image isn't necessary, nor does it particularly illustrate the relevant concept. The description of the video is much more evocative than that screenshot. If the idea is to have a recent image of Ray Bradbury in there, there are two fairly recent ones (within 5 years of his death) already on the commons (I linked them in the talk page there). 0x0077BE [^talk/_contrib] 16:03, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the WP:NFCC#8 arguments above. Kelly ^hi! 06:50, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Don't get me wrong, I love this image. But the free use rationale just isn't enough. I can see how it might marginally improve the article about the music video, but I don't see any need for it. It's just a low-quality image that portrays Bradbury's reaction in a much less clear way than the text already does. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 14:26, 13 October 2014 (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:F-Me Ray Bradbury screen cap 02.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: Keep. TLSuda (talk) 13:23, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8: seemingly random screenshot, not discussed critically. Stefan2 (talk) 14:57, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This image's use seems reasonable to me, it's specifically chosen to show the performer of the video and the subject of the song, it's part of an infobox, and it would likely be very hard to describe the provocative nature of the performer's style of dress and the general tone of the video in words alone. Since the entire article is about a copyrighted work, it seems very unlikely that a free replacement will be found. 0x0077BE [^talk/_contrib] 15:11, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- The article does not contain any sourced critical discussion of what the performer looks like. Therefore, it is unimportant to see what the performer looks like. Also, the fact that the image is used in an infobox is irrelevant. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:17, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - Sourced critical discussion of Bloom's appearance, the video's parodic nature, and budget limitations is available ([1], [2], etc.) for any interested editor to further expand this article. - Dravecky (talk) 16:10, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as the image was quite carefully chosen to depict the song's subject and performer as well as illustrate the lascivious nature of her appearance and attire (plus the overall design ethos of the production) in a way that no mere words can adequately convey to the reader. No free replacement is available for this image. - Dravecky (talk) 16:54, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- However, images used solely for the purpose of "illustrating" something are not permitted. There is also no sourced critical discussion about the design, so no pictures of the design are required. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:17, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, I think this image passes the WP:NFCC#8 test in adding to the reader's understanding of the topic. Kelly ^hi! 06:53, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- In which way? This looks just like a typical infobox image from a television episode article, and such images are deleted for violation of WP:NFCC#8 all of the time. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:17, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep does illustrate the subject of a sourced article. Cramyourspam (talk) 13:19, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- It is irrelevant if the article is sourced or not. The mere fact that an article lists sources does not automatically mean that the article may contain non-free images. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:17, 9 October 2014 (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.