Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 July 8

< July 7	July 9 >

July 8

File:Churchschool.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, smaller resolution version of File:Churchlaneschool.jpg. Not eligible for deletion under F8 as there is a small difference (a border). — ξ ^xplicit 00:12, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, useless in light of the similar Commons image. Nyttend (talk) 19:39, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete duplicate. —innotata 20:34, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Belmont Tropy.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F9 by Nyttend (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 00:12, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possible CV. This image was tagged as a CV of an image on this page, but I declined it because the one here on Wikipedia is technically superior (it doesn't appear as grainy, for example) and lacks the watermark that is so obvious in the bottom left corner of the other image. Nevertheless, I fear that this is a CV of the same image from a different source; the chance of the other website taking this image and modifying it with a false authorship claim is very small, and I expect that it's much more likely that both images are taken from another website. Nyttend (talk) 05:02, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And here it is [1] at same resolution without watermark. Dulay is noted as copyright holder at bottom of page. Froggerlaura ^ribbit 17:45, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Thanks for the help! Nyttend (talk) 18:19, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:BFG logo.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:00, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed speedy. There is already an image of the (very similar) current logo- we do not need to see the historical logos, and it's not clear that this one is in any way significant. J Milburn (talk) 08:24, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:WILLOW SEASON 4 EPISODE 15.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:00, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I dont see how this helps me understand the episode better, its a non free image of a character, who is appearing in a cross over episode. The article could easily have a free image (which there is one), and have the same effect as this. — M.Mario (T/C) 10:38, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:GA~DWAHA?~Cap01.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:00, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A non free screenshot showing two people smiling. It does in no way help me to understand the article better, and there are no critics commenting on this particuar scene (there are no references on the article at all). There are two free images of both of the actresses in this photo, easily replacable. — M.Mario (T/C) 10:46, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:RHCP 1990TourPoster.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete While we de facto allow a single non-free image in many types of articles to provide a visual identification of the subject for the reader, concert tours aren't one of these types. If a particular tour does have a visual identification that would be relevant to the reader, it should be easy enough to find reliable sources that mention the artwork. Anomie ⚔ 01:27, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

decorative non-free image. No critical commentary about this poster and it's rationale with the claim that it somehow significantly contributes to readers' understanding is wholly unjustified. Image fails WP:NFCC#8 Peripitus (Talk) 12:44, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image pertains to the main subject of the article, a concert tour. This is a visual companion to an informative article relating to popular culture. Not sure where the editor derives his/her reasoning for nomination. His/her cut and paste explanation provides zero rationale. The editor feels that all images needed to mentioned in context, which is not true in accordance to Wikipedia policy. This seems overboard and nomination appears to be unnecessary. Itsbydesign (talk) 13:05, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:RHCP 1998TourPoster.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete While we de facto allow a single non-free image in many types of articles to provide a visual identification of the subject for the reader, concert tours aren't one of these types. If a particular tour does have a visual identification that would be relevant to the reader, it should be easy enough to find reliable sources that mention the artwork. Anomie ⚔ 01:27, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

decorative non-free image. No critical commentary about this poster and it's rationale with the claim that it somehow significantly contributes to readers' understanding is wholly unjustified. Image fails WP:NFCC#8 Peripitus (Talk) 12:45, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image pertains to the main subject of the article, a concert tour. This is a visual companion to an informative article relating to popular culture. Not sure where the editor derives his/her reasoning for nomination. His/her cut and paste explanation provides zero rationale. The editor feels that all images needed to mentioned in context, which is not true in accordance to Wikipedia policy. This seems overboard and nomination appears to be unnecessary. Itsbydesign (talk) 13:05, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:RHCP 2004TourPoster.png

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete While we de facto allow a single non-free image in many types of articles to provide a visual identification of the subject for the reader, concert tours aren't one of these types. If a particular tour does have a visual identification that would be relevant to the reader, it should be easy enough to find reliable sources that mention the artwork. Anomie ⚔ 01:27, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

decorative non-free image. No critical commentary about this poster and it's rationale with the claim that it somehow significantly contributes to readers' understanding is wholly unjustified. Image fails WP:NFCC#8 Peripitus (Talk) 12:45, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image pertains to the main subject of the article, a concert tour. This is a visual companion to an informative article relating to popular culture. Not sure where the editor derives his/her reasoning for nomination. His/her cut and paste explanation provides zero rationale. The editor feels that all images needed to mentioned in context, which is not true in accordance to Wikipedia policy. This seems overboard and nomination appears to be unnecessary. Itsbydesign (talk) 13:05, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:RHCP 1991TourPoster.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete While we de facto allow a single non-free image in many types of articles to provide a visual identification of the subject for the reader, concert tours aren't one of these types. If a particular tour does have a visual identification that would be relevant to the reader, it should be easy enough to find reliable sources that mention the artwork. Anomie ⚔ 01:27, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

decorative non-free image. No critical commentary about this poster and it's rationale with the claim that it somehow significantly contributes to readers' understanding is wholly unjustified. Image fails WP:NFCC#8 Peripitus (Talk) 12:47, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image pertains to the main subject of the article, a concert tour. This is a visual companion to an informative article relating to popular culture. Not sure where the editor derives his/her reasoning for nomination. His/her cut and paste explanation provides zero rationale. The editor feels that all images needed to mentioned in context, which is not true in accordance to Wikipedia policy. This seems overboard and nomination appears to be unnecessary. Itsbydesign (talk) 13:05, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:RHCP 1986TourPoster.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete While we de facto allow a single non-free image in many types of articles to provide a visual identification of the subject for the reader, concert tours aren't one of these types. If a particular tour does have a visual identification that would be relevant to the reader, it should be easy enough to find reliable sources that mention the artwork. Anomie ⚔ 01:27, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

decorative non-free image. No critical commentary about this poster and it's rationale with the claim that it somehow significantly contributes to readers' understanding is wholly unjustified. Image fails WP:NFCC#8 Peripitus (Talk) 12:48, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image pertains to the main subject of the article, a concert tour. This is a visual companion to an informative article relating to popular culture. This is no different than a movie poster or CD cover. Not sure where the editor derives his/her reasoning for nomination. His/her cut and paste explanation provides zero rationale. The editor feels that all images needed to mentioned in context, which is not true in accordance to Wikipedia policy. This seems overboard and nomination appears to be unnecessary. Itsbydesign (talk) 13:05, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:You us.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:00, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

decorative non-free image. There is precisely zero mention of the covers, or this alternative cover, in the article and I cannot see what, particularly what of significance, this images adds to reader's understanding. Without sourced commentary about the image itself this clearly fails WP:NFCC#8 Peripitus (Talk) 12:52, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Jissr-groom.ext

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: Image does not exist. If the file name in the header contains a typo, feel free to correct the typo and un-close this discussion. AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:08, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The image is unencyclopaedic, and a caricature of the culture it claims to represent (practically a Borat-like characterization) I know for a fact that this image is not representative of the culture it claims to be Lordsheikh (talk) 15:41, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Jissr-groom.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons. Please nominate it for deletion there if you still feel it should be deleted. AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:08, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The image is unencyclopaedic, and a caricature of the culture it claims to represent (practically a Borat-like characterization) I know for a fact that this image is not representative of the culture it claims to be Lordsheikh (talk) 15:42, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:TomHardyBane.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:05, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seems too high in resolution to meet Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria, same image already exists in a lower resolution at File:Bane Tom Hardy5.jpg. Chris the Paleontologist (talk • contribs) 16:05, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.