Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2008 January 24

< January 23	January 25 >

January 24

Image:Randy-Moss.jpg

Image:Randy-Moss.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Suran37 | contribs).

Copyrighted, no licensing, example found here.
Gonzo fan2007 ^{talk ♦ contribs} 00:16, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Jake.jpg

Image:Jake.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Hayman91 | contribs).

The name is too generic. Some uploaded versions are not properly licensed. I will notify all involved uploaders to use more precise image names. This page should be deleted and locked out. Jusjih (talk) 03:05, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I use it as a picture of myself at WP:BRC. Jmlk 1 7 05:07, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) That's not a reason not to just upload under another name. Dihydrogen Monoxide (party) 05:15, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The point is whether this is a valid deletion. the_undertow ^talk 05:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per no given reason to delete. I don't see why the name of the file is the issue here. Jmlk 1 7 05:30, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Is generic a typical rationale here? If not, we can easily remedy the license. the_undertow ^talk 05:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep "Too generic" is not a reason to upload under another name either. This doesn't even make sense. It alerts that you're uploading over an existing image. If that warning is ignored, you get reverted. I mean, is this a new thing now that we're going to go delete everything with a generic name? Because I'm sure there are a lot of such images. Particularly those used for userspace only. Lara❤Love 05:25, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Is the image name even a valid deletion reason? I have never seen this deletion rationale. Names of files are largely moot anyways... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:45, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Arnold-AS-Conan-3.jpg

Image is clearly a deriv work of [1]. --Megapixie (talk) 04:48, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Rubyridgebook.jpg

Image:Rubyridgebook.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Grandpafootsoldier | contribs).

Image is a book cover of the book, The Federal Siege At Ruby Ridge. Image was incorrectly being used in the article Ruby Ridge. Image would only be fair-use in the article about the book itself, and as no article on that book exists, this image should be deleted. Cirt (talk) 05:28, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Article is about the incident behind the book, and mentions the book itself. As there is no article on just the book, this seems a fair use of a low-res image in an article that is about both the incident and the book. Yaf (talk) 05:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Per Yaf. However, it might be a good idea to move the image back down to the "Aftermath" section where I originally had it positioned. Having the cover of Mr. Weaver's book at the head of the article (especially with its rather confrontational image of the cross-hairs over Mrs. Weaver with child) could be seen as a POV violation. -- Grandpafootsoldier (talk) 06:43, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Okay, I've moved it. -- Grandpafootsoldier (talk) 06:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Mac-Pro-2006-2008.png

Image:Mac-Pro-2006-2008.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Not | contribs).

Not fair use, object exists, can be photographed ALTON .ıl 06:07, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete - Tag with {{subst:rfu}}, don't need to come here. Dihydrogen Monoxide (party) 06:37, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Knightlogo.jpg

Image:Knightlogo.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by El Greco | contribs).

Image:Knightlogo.jpg - obsoleted by Image:Knightlogo.png. Original image was deleted from the Knight Rider page because no fair use was given by the original poster. El Greco uploaded a new file, but for some reason the sizing was goofed up and the image was distorted. I uploaded the same image, this time as a .png file, and it seemed to fix the problem. Plus I redid the fair use tag as El Greco's version was lacking adequate information. Cyberia23 (talk) 08:01, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Gamespot.png

Image:Gamespot.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Armando12 | contribs).

The image contains copyrighted trademarks and images of other companies besides Gamespot and in which while may be licensed to Gamespot to use on their web site, are not free or licensed to be used on Wikipedia. - ✰ALLSTAR✰ ^echo 10:00, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Iraq attacks.jpg

Image:Iraq attacks.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by BenB4 | contribs).

The argument that it's public domain is completely incorrect. The facts and figures aren't copyrighted, but the graph (an expression) is. The image could not be kept under fair use, because is replaceable. --Superm401 - Talk 10:45, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moot - I have uploaded a line graph of the same data (it used to be a bar graph). As only incidental non-expressive typographic elements which serve only to describe the data remain, there is no residual expression which could be subject to copyright. Pbt54 (talk) 11:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]