Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2008 October 4

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< October 3 October 5 >

October 4[edit]

Image:Epicycloid.png[edit]

Image:Epicycloid.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Mond (notify | contribs).
  • This image is only used on a talk page where it was moved in Aug 2006 with the basic comment asking if anyone thought the image was needed -- At this point, I would have to say it is not needed. The image is also licensed as GFDL-presumed, so it is not cleanly licensed either. Jordan 1972 (talk) 00:01, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I uploaded the picture. I made it myself with octave (matlab clone). So the license should not be a problem. But since there are better pictures available in the article it is obsolete and I do not mind if it is deleted. Mond (talk) 10:26, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Formosaview.jpg[edit]

Image:Formosaview.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Vogensen (notify | contribs).
  • orphaned image, licensed with GFDL-presumed but the text provided when uploading states that the "photo was scanned from a tourist brochure...there was no mention of a copyright" Jordan 1972 (talk) 00:21, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ftfc.gif[edit]

Image:Ftfc.gif (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Jack_Lumber (notify | contribs).
  • orphaned image, absent uploader, unencyclopedic personal drawing, licensed as GFDL-presumed Jordan 1972 (talk) 00:38, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Overtkill.JPG[edit]

Image:Overtkill.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Avatar of chaos (notify | contribs).

Image:Glebe.jpg[edit]

Image:Glebe.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by El_Coyote (notify | contribs).
  • orpahned image, absent uploader, licnesed as GFDL-presumed and is easily replaceable Jordan 1972 (talk) 01:00, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Rfs notability.PNG[edit]

Image:Rfs notability.PNG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by WH Coordinator (notify | contribs).
  • A Google screenshot, uploaded only to try to shoehorn a claim of notability onto an article that is at AfD. Is not in any way an image of what the article it is being used on is actually about. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:26, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. No WP policy cited to warrant deletion. The Image is a screenshot of search engine results that establishes notability of the article subject through its 400000+ appearances on the web.WH Coordinator (talk) 04:32, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The uploader, and the previous "Keep" vote, thinks that uploading a screen shot of a zillion Google hits, proves that his multi-level marketing pyramid scheme passes WP:N when it does not. His efforts are misguided, he should see WP:GOOGLE#Notability. Reswobslc (talk) 05:14, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
WP:GOOGLE#Notability is inapplicable as it talks about a single term return (Madonna) on multiple term search (Madonna of the Rocks), the RFS returns the complete multiple term composition "Reverse Funnel System" on the "Reverse Funnel System" search. WH Coordinator (talk) 05:28, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • In any event, the AfD will likely be closed within the next 24 hours, and if the article is deleted this image will serve even less of a purpose than it does now and all this talk will be for nothing so I suggest we wait on the AfD result. Beeblebrox (talk) 05:47, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ok, the article is gone, this image serves absolutely no purpose in any way now. Beeblebrox (talk) 06:47, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete uploading non-free images just to "prove" a point in a meta discussion about an article is not acceptable per WP:NONFREE. Cite sources, don't copy them. In this case a simple link to the search result would serve the same purpose. --Sherool (talk) 11:18, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Bombay - humma humma clip.ogg[edit]

Image:Bombay - humma humma clip.ogg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Hydkat (notify | contribs).
  • The WP:Music Samples guideline recommends that except in exceptional cases, music samples should be no longer than 30 seconds (and less than 10% of the length of the track). This sample provides no reason to exceed the guideline.  ★  Bigr Tex 02:02, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Biohazard Business.ogg[edit]

Image:Biohazard Business.ogg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Ceoil (notify | contribs).
  • The WP:Music Samples guideline recommends that except in exceptional cases, music samples should be no longer than 30 seconds and less than 10% of the length of the track. "Business" is 4:04 long, so the sample should be less than 24.4 seconds to meet the guideline. This sample is 34 seconds long and provides no reason to exceed the guideline.  ★  Bigr Tex 02:02, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The file should be deleted, because it does not function at all. MrDuDe33 (talk) 15:54, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Vinca_A.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 debate was: - Keep they are free, noone has criticised their accuracy and someone intends their use in an article. I will tag them for moving to commons though - Peripitus (Talk) 11:16, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Vinca_A.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Nikola_Smolenski (notify | contribs).
Image:Vinca_B.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_CH.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_D.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_DH.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_E.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_F.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_G.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_H.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_I.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_K.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_L.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_M.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_N.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_O.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_P.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_Q.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_R.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_S.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_SH.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_ST.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_T.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_TH.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_U.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_V.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
Image:Vinca_Z.png (delete | talk | history | logs)
This has already been proposed a few times. The images could be used to illustrate the article on Radivoje Pešić and his theories when it is created. Nikola (talk) 18:57, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The three images I looked at after this comment had no history of deletion discussions. It's been 4.5 years since the images were orphaned. ({{Orphan image}} and WP:NOTWEBHOST)
There is no history of an article on Pešić being deleted. If an article on Pešić is created, there will be links from here and from the Vinča signs article where someone could find these images and request that they be undeleted.
Since they are free images, another option would be to move them to Commons if someone thought that they would eventually be useful somewhere. ~  ★  Bigr Tex 01:15, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I intend to create article about Pesic soon and use the images there. Nikola (talk) 05:53, 11 October 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:Janet jackson all for you promo 12 inch vinyl cover.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 debate was: - Delete - The artwork is insufficiently different to require the additional picture to significantly increase reader's understanding - fails NFCC#8 and as a close image NFCC#3 - Peripitus (Talk) 11:10, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Janet jackson all for you promo 12 inch vinyl cover.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Reqluce (notify | contribs).
  • This alternate single cover does not differ significantly from its original cover; it's just a vinyl record containing an extract from the original cover. It does not add significance to the article and only serves to clutter the page. Funk Junkie (talk) 03:20, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • This alternate single cover differs significantly from the original. While being BASED on the original CD cover, it is a VINYL STICKER cover and shows how the original artwork has been re-edited and issued as part of a series of records released to issue the song. Furthermore, the “format” section in the infobox does state 12” vinyl as one of the formats and therefore this is DEFINITELY significant. Reqluce (talk) 03:22, 4 October 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:Paris Holiday vhs.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 debate was: speedy delete per G7, author request. ~ L'Aquatique[talk] 09:13, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Paris Holiday vhs.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Ed Fitzgerald (notify | contribs).
  • No minimal usage per WP:NFCC#3 and no significance per WP:NFCC#8. Paris Holiday article has dvd cover and a non-free screenshot. Multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information. Its presence wouldn't significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission wouldn't be detrimental to that understanding. Kmusgrave (talk) 05:29, 4 October 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:Image_name.ext[edit]

Image:Image_name.ext (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by [[User talk:#Image:Image_name.ext listed for deletion|]] ([ notify] | contribs).

Image:A.Kolia_in_memoriam.JPG[edit]

Image:A.Kolia_in_memoriam.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Traboini (notify | contribs).

WIKIPEDIA IS MEMORIAL....ALL PEOPLE IN WIKIPEDIA ARE DEAD......DO NOT DELETE MY IMAZH PLEASE —Preceding unsigned comment added by Traboini (talk • contribs) 05:35, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Aizat.jpg[edit]

Image:Aizat.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Amlir89 (notify | contribs).
  • Orphaned Unencyclopedic Absent uploader MER-C 09:58, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:As_My_Eye_Sinks_Into_My_Head_July_2008.jpg[edit]

Image:As_My_Eye_Sinks_Into_My_Head_July_2008.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by HarukaHavok (notify | contribs).
Image:As My Eye Sinks Into My Head 2008.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs)
  • Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader MER-C 10:27, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Basel_Abu_Jamous.JPG[edit]

Image:Basel_Abu_Jamous.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Basel_Abu_Jamous (notify | contribs).
  • Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader MER-C 10:38, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ben_Soccer.JPG[edit]

Image:Ben_Soccer.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Bensellers (notify | contribs).
Image:BenSellers 6333.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs)
  • Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader MER-C 10:42, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Bill1.jpg[edit]

Image:Bill1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Kinglite (notify | contribs).
Image:Skate.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs)
  • Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader MER-C 10:55, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:187 Men To Avoid.gif[edit]

Image:187 Men To Avoid.gif (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Elonka (notify | contribs).
  • Copyright image with no fair-use rationale and not used to illustrate an article discussing this book Richard Pinch (talk) 11:36, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This particular cover is interesting because it is of a very rare book, which shows the penname "Danielle Brown". This was a collaboration with the author-of-record's husband, bestselling author Dan Brown (I also think it's fairly amusing, considering the title). --Elonka 03:28, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, as nominator. I see that this image now has a fair-use rationale, which is good, but I fear that it does not address the issue, hence this followup. The rationale now states The image is used for identification in the context of critical commentary of the work for which it serves as cover art. It makes a significant contribution to the user's understanding of the article, which could not practically be conveyed by words alone.The image is used in a discussion of the author of the work, for purposes of commentary on the author and how it relates to this work. The discussion of the author would not be complete without referring to this work. The book is currently available in stock at Amazon.co.uk, which is hardly "very rare" (sales rank 841,906), and is sufficiently identified (for the purposes of the discussion of its author) by its bibliographic data considering that the article contains no critical commentary whatsoever on this book. Richard Pinch (talk) 17:18, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • The image has had a Fair Use Rationale since February, and has not been changed.[1] If there are concerns that it should be better worded, by all means feel free to fix it. --Elonka 21:17, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Quite right, so it has, I withdraw that part of the nomination (perils of cut and paste, my mistake). However my comments above still stand. I think it impossible to "fix" the rationale since I believe that use of this sort of image for this sort of purpose is contrary to policy. Richard Pinch (talk) 21:29, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete This commercial image has not been used to accompany an article explaining the content of the book in any way at all. Mathsci (talk) 21:40, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Bald Book.jpg[edit]

Image:Bald Book.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Elonka (notify | contribs).
  • Copyright image with no fair-use rationale and not used to illustrate an article discussing this book Richard Pinch (talk) 11:41, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Braids_by_Yessenia.jpg[edit]

Image:Braids_by_Yessenia.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Yessenia0606 (notify | contribs).

Image:Brandon2.JPG[edit]

Image:Brandon2.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Cubbyboy (notify | contribs).
Image:Tyler2.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Cubbyboy
  • Orphaned Unencyclopedic Absent uploader MER-C 11:44, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:07-04-2008 03;18;08PM.JPG[edit]

Image:07-04-2008 03;18;08PM.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Billy Hathorn (notify | contribs).
  • Photo tagged as Multilicense, but I doubt this is a work of the uploader. Kmusgrave (talk) 12:49, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The photo is in the 1969 Louisiana Tech yearbook. The yearbook has no copyright.Billy Hathorn (talk) 00:27, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is no proof that the yearbook has no copyright. No link to a webpage with an explicit permission is provided, no tag with an OTRS ticket number has been added. Kmusgrave (talk) 00:46, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, has no copyright as in has no copyright notice as required by US law at the time of publishing? If you can't find an explicit notice, the entire book would be {{PD-US-no notice}}. ViperSnake151 12:30, 5 October 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 discussion was: keep. Uploader states that yearbook has no copyright notice page. The work would therefore be in the public domain since it was published before 1978. -Nv8200p talk 00:28, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Spinks 07-04-2008 03;20;13PM.JPG[edit]

Image:Spinks 07-04-2008 03;20;13PM.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Billy Hathorn (notify | contribs).
  • Photo tagged as Multilicense, but I doubt this is a work of the uploader. Kmusgrave (talk) 12:52, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The photo is in the 1969 Louisiana Tech yearbook. The yearbook has no copyright.Billy Hathorn (talk) 00:27, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is no proof that the yearbook has no copyright. No link to a webpage with an explicit permission is provided, no tag with an OTRS ticket number has been added. Kmusgrave (talk) 00:47, 5 October 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:NateBall.jpg[edit]

Image:NateBall.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Captain_Awesome (notify | contribs).
  • Not used, seems to have been uploaded only for a now deleted nonsense article. Sherool (talk) 16:17, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:NewGlassesSmall.jpg[edit]

Image:NewGlassesSmall.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Sarge_2.0 (notify | contribs).

Image:Soulja Boy Bird Walk Cover.JPG[edit]

Image:Soulja Boy Bird Walk Cover.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by NickNbeezy (notify | contribs).
  • This is a homemade image presented as the cover for a commercially released single, which it clearly is not (single has not even been released yet). WP:HOAX. —Hello, Control Hello, Tony 17:22, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete likely a copyright violation, very small res & the user have a history of uploading copyright violations. --Kanonkas :  Talk  09:08, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:DSC 0057 Orig.jpg[edit]

Image:DSC 0057 Orig.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Quixotic92 (notify | contribs).
  • Image for a soon to be deleted article. (and salted article) Undead Warrior (talk) 18:23, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Nigeltomm.jpg[edit]

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

Image:6313.gif[edit]

Image:6313.gif (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Advocate70 (notify | contribs).
  • I forgot to properly name the image per guidelines, and reloaded it with a proper name and gave valid fair use rationale on that image. This one is superfluous.--2008Olympian chitchatseemywork 20:47, 4 October 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: no consensus, defaulting to keep. All participants do make valid arguments: the image seems like a textbook example of a {{non-free historic image}}, but it still does need a specific and well-written non-free use rationale to comply with policy. (The issues raised on the article's talk page, however, do not appear relevant expect insofar as that, if a consensus still exists not to include the image in the article, it will be orphaned and hence subject to deletion as such.) —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 04:32, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Exposure_photograph_5.jpg[edit]

Image:Exposure_photograph_5.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Richard_Arthur_Norton_(1958-_) (notify | contribs).
  • Unfree image with inadequate rationale. While the picture is relevant to the article, established consensus (Per Talk:Gerri Santoro) had been to exclude it (although that discussion is almost 2 years old). -Nard 21:13, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rationale meets every criteria demanded by Wikipedia for fair use. You can't have an article on an iconic photo and not have the photo in the article. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 01:21, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The previous debate at the article talk page was a while ago. The recent comments seem to indicate a different view. The authorship and publication details are: "Police took a photograph of Santoro's body as it was found: naked, kneeling, collapsed upon the floor, with a bloody towel between her legs. This picture was published in Ms. magazine in April 1973." It's also been reused in a 1995 documentary. It's a tricky decision. I might mention here, Wikipedia:Image content guidelines, which I started (and which wasn't really advertised enough). Pictures like this are exactly what I was thinking of. See also Talk:Tomoko Uemura in Her Bath for a discussion of a photo where the family objected to continuing publication. Not sure if that is the case with the daughter in this case (her opinion seems to have changed over the years). Carcharoth (talk) 03:52, 11 October 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:Ideal_chain_fixed_reservoir.JPG[edit]

Image:Ideal_chain_fixed_reservoir.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by ThorinMuglindir (notify | contribs).
  • orpahned drawing, recently absent uploader, licensed with as GFDL-presumed Jordan 1972 (talk) 21:52, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also Image:Ideal chain fixed reservoir.png which is a converted version of the nominated image, which itself is orpahned and tagged as GFDL-presumed.

Image:Ideal_chain_random_walk.JPG[edit]

Image:Ideal_chain_random_walk.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by ThorinMuglindir (notify | contribs).

Image:IndiaGateAtNight.jpg[edit]

Nomination withdrawn as uploader's license information was found in history.--Jordan 1972 (talk) 22:10, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Load.PNG[edit]

Image:Load.PNG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Rzaryan (notify | contribs).

Image:Logo_ars.jpg[edit]

Image:Logo_ars.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Ars555 (notify | contribs).
  • Unencyclopedic logo used only the user page of a user who has not contributed since Jan 2007. Nv8200p talk 23:57, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Logo_etv.png[edit]

Image:Logo_etv.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Waltertb (notify | contribs).
  • Copyrighted logo mistagged by uploader and only used on his user page. Nv8200p talk 00:00, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2008_October_4&oldid=1144818141"