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.
Keep as the image is hosted on Wikimedia Commons, not the English Wikipedia. Regardless of the statements within the nomination, the image is used. - auburnpilottalk 21:38, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Close: bad nomination (A.K.A. Keep) - Counter to the nominator's claims, the image is used in the Craigslist article. Perfectly legitimate use, excellent example of good free media that should be kept. -- Y|yukichigai (ramblearguecheck) 16:17, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep GFDL. Excellent image. NO reason to delete. --Knulclunk 20:41, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per Knulclunk. -Icewedge 02:58, 24 September 2007 (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.
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.
Signposts do not have panorama copyright Snowman 12:25, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Then retag it and keep. --Knulclunk 20:42, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But the panorama licence does not extend to notices. Snowman 14:25, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image kept. The notice would not qualify for copyright. -Nv8200ptalk 03:17, 26 September 2007 (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.
AP photo, unacceptable for fair use B 14:07, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Information is given about the source of the data used to create this chart, but nowhere does in the description does it say who created the chart itself. —Remember the dot(talk) 18:23, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Severa created the image herself. I'll edit the image so that is apparent.-Andrew c[talk] 20:01, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I confirm that Severa created this. If necessary we can probably contact her. KillerChihuahua?!? 21:45, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I made this image myself in Photoshop using the data from the AGI study. It said as much in an older version of the page, but I removed the original self-credit, as I had somehow gotten the mistaken impression that self-references were a no-no on image pages. I'll go through the other images I created and add self-attributions if this is necessary to resolve source concerns. -Severa 00:08, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks for the reply. Like you said, please do make sure to say where you got the image, whether you created it yourself or got it from someone else. —Remember the dot(talk) 03:39, 21 September 2007 (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.
I uploaded a more appropriate image and have orphaned this logo. It had a slogan and extra hive thing making it overall unreadable and large. Alyssa Hoffel 20:59, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
