Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2008 July 9

< July 8	July 10 >

July 9

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 debate was

Kept.  Lack of Rationale appears to have been fixed. WilyD 13:42, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P. S. Since I've been asked to explain this closure, I will. "We're not engaging in a productive cycle" is not a deletion rationale. Lacks a fair use rationale is a deletion rationale, but its no longer the case. This image is a small piece of the Dr. Who episode "Last of the Time Lords", for a 45 minute epside there are probably 24 frames per second, we have 65000 frames (or are they 22 minutes? I do not watch this show.) A single frame easily meets NFCC#3, which is explicitly mentioned (although FutPerf doesn't explicitly claim this fails NFCC#3, she might be implying it.) The only other claim is that there's no critical commentary on the Dr. Who episode "Last of the Time Lords", which is patently false. In short, none of the claims underlying the deletion rationales happen to be true. Wily D 14:54, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:LastoftheTimeLords.jpg

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2008 July 18.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

Image:LastoftheTimeLords.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Blurgle Fragle (notify | contribs).

Yet another poorly motivated episode screenshot. Decorative, no reference to it in the text, not used for critical commentary, bla bla, as always. FUR only says "infobox", which in fact makes it speediable for effectively lacking any FUR at all, but I thought I'd better deal with it here. These serial uploads on certain TV series articles must stop. One image gets deleted for failing NFCC#3+#8, and the next day somebody just uploads yet another that is just as useless as the first. This borders on disruptive editing. People, we have a policy here, and dozens and dozens of previous IfDs have confirmed it. You cannot use infobox images just as a matter of routine if they are not motivated by their role of supporting analytical commentary that actually exists in the text. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:03, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The image is mentioned in the text, as it shows the warships built by the earth's enslaved population, as mentioned in the "Synopis" section which is roughly opposite the infobox (and therefore an ideal place in which to put it). I would argue the the image adds critical commentary as it shows the sheer scale of the Master's plan and the threat the Earth is facing-- one of the major themes of the episode. Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:57, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I think your "borders on disruptive editing" comment is uncalled for. I assume the user acted in good faith when they uploaded the image. I've attempted to improve the FUR. Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:08, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Who said being mentioned in the text was a sufficient criterion? It may be a necessary criterion or somewhat close to one, but it's certainly not sufficient. Plus, the image isn't in fact mentioned. The situation it shows is mentioned, the image isn't. What dozens of previous similar debates have shown, time and again, is that simply showing an element of the plot, be that element ever so important within the plot, is not enough. It has to illustrate something crucial about that plot element, something that is an object of explicit analysis through text, but where the text alone is not sufficient to carry out the analysis but is in support of visual help to drive its point home. The image does not "add critical commentary" - how would that be possible, what does that even mean? An image cannot "add commentary". Images don't talk. Commentary is something which, by definition, only text can do. Images can support critical commentary; this one doesn't. Anything the image shows can easily be rendered through text, including the fact of the "sheer size" (If this piece of information is important, a simple adjective like "huge" will do the trick. Come on, language is not that powerless.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:20, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete but only because the image is now orphaned. If it is put into use again, a reasonable FUR is a must. — BQZip01 — ^talk 19:38, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored the image to Last of the Time Lords, as there doesn't seem to be any rationale for removing it besides NFC issues. Orphaning it as a means of enforcing NFCC and then deleting it as orphaned wouldn't make much sense; let's evaluate the other NFCC concerns apart from WP:NFCC#7, since the application of #7 is contingent on those other concerns being valid. (Not assuming bad faith of anyone; looks like this was just a misunderstanding.) — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 09:32, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'delete replaceable, with freely licenced GFDL text Fasach Nua (talk) 14:05, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fair use uploads should be done on a considerate and thoughtful basis, not on the delete->upload->delete cycle. Though at the same time, I implore the nominator not to create a chilling effect regarding his nominations. Sceptre ^(talk) 15:32, 13 July 2008 (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.

The result of the debate was

Deleted.  Orphaned fair use. WilyD 13:43, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:RTE Mast Christmas.jpg

Image:RTE Mast Christmas.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Howth575 (notify | contribs).

image is of poor quality and of little use to the article i uploaded it for. howth575 (talk) 16:16, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete per uploader's comments. — BQZip01 — ^talk 19:38, 12 July 2008 (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.

The result of the debate was

Deleted.  Orphaned, no apparent value. WilyD 13:45, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Keljuan.jpg

Image:Keljuan.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Keljuan (notify | contribs).

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Nv8200p talk 17:42, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Orphaned, but could be encyclopedic if we knew anything about this person. — BQZip01 — ^talk 04:39, 14 July 2008 (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.

The result of the debate was

Deleted.  Nonfree, unused. WilyD 13:46, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:KellyClarksonNeverAgain.jpg

Image:KellyClarksonNeverAgain.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Drecey1971 (notify | contribs).

Orphaned, Copyright violation Nv8200p talk 17:56, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. — BQZip01 — ^talk 19:39, 12 July 2008 (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.

Image:B777_Orders_Deliveries.png

Image:B777_Orders_Deliveries.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Inetpup (notify | contribs).

Orphaned, unsourced original research Cumulus Clouds (talk) 17:59, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, but it may have a verifiable source, but given that it's been on here for about 2 months with no use... — BQZip01 — ^talk 19:41, 12 July 2008 (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.

The result of the debate was

Deleted.  Orphaned, of no clear value. WilyD 13:48, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:KelvinsEghosaAghayedo.gif

Image:KelvinsEghosaAghayedo.gif (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Kelvinseghosa (notify | contribs).

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Nv8200p talk 18:04, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. — BQZip01 — ^talk 19:41, 12 July 2008 (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.

The result of the debate was

Deleted.  Unused, no clear value, possibly troubling copyright. WilyD 17:33, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:KemalGözler.jpg

Image:KemalGözler.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Cretanforever (notify | contribs).

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Nv8200p talk 18:04, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. — BQZip01 — ^talk 19:41, 12 July 2008 (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.

The result of the debate was

Deleted.  Orphaned, problematic licence. WilyD 17:36, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ken-Dolan.jpg

Image:Ken-Dolan.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by PIRIMP (notify | contribs).

No evidence permisssion was granted to use the image under the GFDL. Nv8200p talk 18:09, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Duplicate image, possible copyvio, but no evidence it wasn't uploaded properly. — BQZip01 — ^talk 19:45, 12 July 2008 (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.

Image:KenMcKenna2.jpg

Image:KenMcKenna2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Adreamer323 (notify | contribs).

Copyright violation, Scan of a newspaper clipping. Nv8200p talk 18:10, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete per nom. — BQZip01 — ^talk 19:45, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:KenMcKenna4.jpg

Image:KenMcKenna4.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Adreamer323 (notify | contribs).

Bad license, likely copyright violation Cumulus Clouds (talk) 18:27, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Copyright is stated as being held by another person, fails WP:NFCC as the image can indeed be replaced (the guy is alive, near as I can tell). — BQZip01 — ^talk 19:48, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:KenMcKenna6.jpg

Image:KenMcKenna6.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Adreamer323 (notify | contribs).

Likely copyright vio, based on other contribs, "office PR" in author line and "McKenna Public Use Files" as source. No other evidence this image is in the public domain. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 18:31, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete inadequate source information to determine copyright status. — BQZip01 — ^talk 19:49, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:KenMcKenna3.jpg

Image:KenMcKenna3.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Adreamer323 (notify | contribs).

Likely copyright violation, per all the others and "news article writer" in author line. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 18:32, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete inadequate source information to determine copyright status. — BQZip01 — ^talk 19:50, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:KenMcKenna.jpg

Image:KenMcKenna.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Adreamer323 (notify | contribs).

Copyright violation, no author listing and bad source information Cumulus Clouds (talk) 18:34, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete inadequate source information to determine copyright status. — BQZip01 — ^talk 19:50, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:NIBE-heating-logo-red.gif

Image:NIBE-heating-logo-red.gif (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Erwinn (notify | contribs).

Orphan. Used in article Nibe - an article about a Danish company. The logo was used in the article with text of a Swedish heating company. The text was a copyvio so I deleted it instead of moving it, and so the image is an orphan. apoltix (talk) 18:44, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. — BQZip01 — ^talk 19:51, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Goingthrough.jpg

Image:Goingthrough.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Tyy tad (notify | contribs).

Image is too small to be of any use. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 19:04, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now as there isn't anything to replace it. FUR is far more than adequate. It looks fine on my screen. Should a better version be uploaded, this should be speedy deleted. — BQZip01 — ^talk 19:53, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Image kept -Nv8200p talk 03:22, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]