Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2007 November 14

< November 13	November 15 >

November 14[edit]

Image:Splendour 103.jpg[edit]

Image:Splendour 103.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Sklethal (notify | contribs).

Unencyclopaedic. Only appears in article that will almost certainly be deleted as WP:MADEUP. Handschuh-^{talk to me} 05:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Apart from the fact that "Unencyclopaedic" isnt even a word, the image portrays what the term is all about. In addition to this, a future POSSIBILITY of deletion is not a reason to dismantly the page before this verdict is reached. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.101.94.180 (talk) 05:43, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well since encyclopaedic is a word, and adding the prefix un generally denotes a word's antonym, I think the meaning is fairly clear. Handschuh-^{talk to me} 05:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There aernt many Ghiits for it, lets use the same criteria we use for attacking the goon shower entry aye! Eitherway the picture should be deleted along with the entry (if this unfortunately occurs) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.101.94.180 (talk) 11:39, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Please note that the article Goon Shower has now been deleted, and the image is not used elsewhere. Handschuh-^{talk to me} 08:01, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image has been deleted since it was now orphaned and that the article Goon shower has been deleted per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Goon shower.--JForget 18:50, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Solid nitrogen.jpg[edit]

Free licensed images available, it can be replaced with Image:2007Computex Day2 Hall2-23.jpg or Image:2007Intel45nmProcessorLaunchInTaiwan_OverclockingExperiment.jpg. BrockF5 06:17, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Wontbedoingthatagain.jpg[edit]

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

Unencyclopedic and frankly offensive. WP isn't censored, but... (Can an image be speedied as an attack page?) Eron^Talk 13:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- It's gone per WP:CSD#G3. —Wknight94 (talk) 14:46, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Wiikipedian.jpg[edit]

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

UE Wikipedian 14:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Lu-wiki1.jpg[edit]

Image:Lu-wiki1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by TorchSJU (notify | contribs).

Photoshopped picture of uploader's buddy. Richfife 16:29, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Greg-wiki2.jpg[edit]

Image:Greg-wiki2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by TorchSJU (notify | contribs).

Photoshopped picture of uploader's buddy. Richfife 16:29, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Spasq-wiki1.jpg[edit]

Image:Spasq-wiki1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by TorchSJU (notify | contribs).

Photoshopped picture of uploader's buddy. Richfife 16:29, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Crespin.jpg[edit]

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

Probable copyvio; source gives no indication of GFDL release. —An gr 17:19, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I could not find any copyright notices on the cited website [1] where this autographed photo was posted. --Mathsci 00:16, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The same image also appears on flickr [2], a source which User:Angr has himself used for producing an image [3] for the WP article on Yo-Yo Ma. --Mathsci 01:26, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The absence of a copyright notice does not imply an image is not copyrighted. Flickr has images with many different licensing tags on them. The Régine Crespin is tagged "© All rights reserved". The Yo-Yo Ma image, on the other hand, is licensed under the Creative Commons "Attribution/Share-Alike" license, which is a free license. —An gr 05:22, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Bike Ad June 1941.JPG[edit]

Image:Bike Ad June 1941.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by TimmyTruck (notify | contribs).

Probably copyvio; uploader is extremely unlikely to be creator of this 1940s advertisement. —An gr 17:19, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Do you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the uploader is NOT the creator?TimmyTruck 19:02, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say I did; I said it is extremely unlikely, and it is. —An gr 05:23, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The burden of proof is on you. You're making the accusations/insinuations. I don't want to get in a fight about this (I like you!) but your attitude reminds me of my days in Nazi Germany when people were hauled in because they were "likely" to be Jewish based on the shape their noses. I hope Wikipedia is not run in a similar fashion.
- Delete Uh, no. The burden of proof is on you, and you haven't denied what he said. You may want to read Godwin's law, by the way. You just about set a record there. - Richfife 23:13, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Un, no. In America, the burden of proof is on the accuser. One is innocent until proven guilty. Wikipedia, (based in Florida, USA, and thus conversant with American judicial procedure) is making an accusation and the burden of proof is upon Wikipedia. I'll be 99 years old in two months and fled Nazi Germany. I know what I'm talking about. In America, one is innocent until proven guilty. One does NOT have to prove one's innocence in America. The burden of proof is upon the accuser to prove the guilt of the accused. The accuser has offered no proof here -- only a suspicion. What? A Jew can't get a job in an American advertising firm? Oy. Let me know. TimmyTruck 01:30, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ah, you're a troll. I'll stop feeding you now. - Richfife 05:59, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Fine. Get a life.TimmyTruck 14:40, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- ~~Keep.~~ Already !voted above. I don't know where you're from but I daresay it's not America. In 1692, old men and women in Salem, Massacusetts were accused of being witches, and, yes, the burden of proof was upon those poor frightened souls to prove their innocence by reciting the Lord's prayer without a slip. America, Land of the Free, has come a long way since the days of colonial witch hunting. A man is innocent until proven guilty. Oy. Let me know.TimmyTruck 01:50, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per Angr. Please disregard trolling. -- RG ² 09:42, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I seriously doubt Timmy was around to make this poster in 1941. Sasha Call 16:45, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Stop the name calling. It's that how Wikipedians arrive at a consensus? By ganging up on an old man like street corner thugs and calling him a troll? By making up the mind and isolating one old man for abuse? Some should be ashamed of yourself! Oy. Have your fun with an old man. Get it out of your system. Oy. Get a life. -- TimmyTruck (talk) 21:11, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Matt Damon Departed.jpg[edit]

Image:Matt Damon Departed.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Ryser915 (notify | contribs).

Copyrighted image (screenshot), that appears on no articles. Fails WP:NFCC point number 7. Sasha Call 18:48, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Therunaway.jpeg[edit]

Image:Therunaway.jpeg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Ryser915 (notify | contribs).

copyrighted image that appears on no articles, thus failing WP:NFCC policy number 7. Sasha Call 20:35, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:T LOGO.png[edit]

Image:T LOGO.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Ryser915 (notify | contribs).

Redundant copyrighted image (can be replaced with Image:MBTA Logo.jpg) Sasha Call 20:37, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Les-Ecoules.jpg[edit]

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

tagged as GFDL, but the source does not mention this. Rette tast 22:28, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There seem to be no copyright notices on the french blog site on which this image occurs. --Mathsci 00:18, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of copyright notice doesn't mean the image isn't copyrighted, and certainly doesn't mean the uploader is entitled to license it under the GFDL. —An gr 15:38, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]