Jump to content

Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2007 August 24

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

August 24

[edit]
Image:Haraj.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Sean-Jin (notify | contribs).
Image:TAKAYAMA.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Sean-Jin (notify | contribs).
Image:00c.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Carls12 (notify | contribs).

The deletionists win again. They can celebrate another victory tonight. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 03:58, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a deletion based on lies. It is a disgrace to this encyclopedia, and it shall not stand. --Silent Wind of Doom 17:51, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Het Steen.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Rd232 (notify | contribs).
Image:TheMadPlumber.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by VirtualSteve (notify | contribs).
Image:SOAPnew.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Nehrams2020 (notify | contribs).
  • Alternate poster for a film. The film article already contains the primary poster, rationale doesn't explain why a second poster is needed. Videmus Omnia Talk 04:24, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It is not evident to me what may be gleaned from this second poster, but it also seems quite possible that something might be in this Good Article. I have posted an advisory to the Article's Talk page notifying those engaged and interested in the article that this image is up for deletion and soliciting their input. Before editors even bring images in cases like this here for deletion, I encourage them to do something similar--that is, raise their concerns with the article's participants and readership, on the appropriate Talk page.—DCGeist 01:53, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I put the image up for speedy deletion as it does no longer meet the criteria for inclusion on the article. I appreciate DCGeist leaving a message on my talk page and the article's talk page. Otherwise, it would have been a surprise to see the image just disappear. --Nehrams2020 00:22, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:THRICEZOMG1337W00TALRIGHTKICKASS.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Pacø (notify | contribs).
Image:Milledoler1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by ExplorerCDT (notify | contribs).
  • Whether it is old enough to be PD is not obvious from the source site even though the subject died in 1852, so I would like to request more opinions. Jusjih 11:24, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Scooped off a website that's copyrighted. We do not have positive source information of where it comes from. It looks like it came from a book that is most likely out of copyright. We just do not know. Rutgers students need to get on the ball and dig this one up. Nodekeeper 12:22, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, since it can't possibly be copyrighted. Explicit source info is only needed for non-free works. – Quadell (talk) (random) 01:52, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sorry? Explicit source info is always necessary. How are we even suppose to know that a work is free or non-free without source info? In this specific case, how do you know that this drawing wasn't made in 1997? Just because it looks old? --Abu badali (talk) 16:00, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Clarence Dock.PNG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by BNC85 (notify | contribs).
Image:Altoetting district coa.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Cordyph (notify | contribs).
Image now orphan. -FlubecaTalk 22:48, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Kabul,_Israel.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Al_Ameer_son (notify | contribs).
Image:Tao.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Ajnewbold (notify | contribs).
How it looks depends on your computer, actually. My computer renders it in the font MS Gothic, which looks fine. Another font, KaiTi, displays it almost identically to the PNG copy up for deletion:
Remember the dot (talk) 21:41, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Not copyright or incorrect. Harmless. No reason to delete.--Knulclunk 02:32, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're right: it's not copyrighted or incorrect. But it is useless and we have enough of an orphaned image problem already. —Remember the dot (talk) 02:45, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Militsya_on_parade.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Fisenko (notify | contribs).


Image:Esquiremag.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Xanderall (notify | contribs).
Image:Harveykeitel.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Tom (notify | contribs).
  • Keep No nonfree image could be created and substituted to show how the star of this movie appeared in this movie. This basic visual information is fundamental to an understanding of the film and an appreciation of its textual description. Image moved from cast listing up into main text of article so reader encounters this informative image sooner.—DCGeist 01:23, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per DCGeist. Image's informative nature in the article qualifies it for fair use - no free equivalents are available. --Strothra 03:24, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]