Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 May 3: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 11:21, 3 May 2012

< May 2	May 4 >

May 3

File:Cuthbert covercropped.jpg

Replaceable non-free image. Actually a free image does already exist at File:Britannica Bookbinding - St. Cuthbert's Gospels.jpg. Kelly ^hi! 20:23, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The suggested replacement image is unable to show the colour and quality of the leather tooling, which is the point of its use in the article. Consequently it is not replaceable in line with fair use guidelines. --Fæ (talk) 21:04, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Fae. The other image has already been pointed out previously. There is very detailed analysis of the design and the four colours involved in the article, which is an FA. Johnbod (talk) 21:56, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - as this book is still in existence, can't the current non-free photo be replaced with a free photo? Kelly ^hi! 04:13, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh. As the image file says, the library does not allow photography. Please research nominations more carefully than this, especially if you are nominating something off TFA. Johnbod (talk) 12:53, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As a general matter, I'm not sure that a technical prohibition on photography would actually prevent a motivated visitor from obtaining a photo. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:10, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Any photograph that would be likely to fulfill the stated purpose of being a better illustration than the old black-and-white one from Britannica, and in particular to give the reader a better idea of the relief and the colouring, would almost certainly require lighting conditions very different from those that are typically found in museum rooms used for displaying ancient manuscripts (which invariably have dimmed light, protective glass etc.) And encouraging Wikipedians to illegally try doing flash photography in such a room, with valuable old manuscripts around, would be a seriously, seriously bad idea. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:49, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Couldn't the library release an image under a free license if the Brittanica one isn't acceptable? Kelly ^hi! 03:21, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Has anyone contacted the library in this regard? Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:10, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — ξ ^xplicit 00:56, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Moravola design.jpg

CAD drawing of a building. I fail to see why it wouldn't be replaceable. I added {{di-replaceable fair use}}, but it was removed without explanation. The image also fails WP:NFCC#3b, so I added {{non-free reduce}}, which was also deleted. Stefan2 (talk) 18:44, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is irreplacable because it came from the computer system of the Architect and is therefore unique.

Can you also explain what your other concerns are? I am not so familiar with WP and all the other tags you have there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hobbes88 (talk • contribs) 20:21, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is replaceable because anyone else could use a CAD program to create a similar image. It fails WP:NFCC#3b because the resolution is too high. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:08, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to see you try to replace the image? How are you going to do it? With what CAD system, and with what original contour site data? The resolution on he original CAD system is much much higher. You need the higher resolution to actually build. I fail to still fail to understand your arguments, It is almost like saying I have paint, therefore I can draw the Mona Lisa. And therefore the Mona Lisa is replacable — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hobbes88 (talk • contribs) 00:13, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a task of me replacing it with someone but of someone being able to replace it. Compare with maps (always replaceable: you could draw your own map) or satellite images (always replaceable: you could take an image with your own satellite). --Stefan2 (talk) 11:55, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — ξ ^xplicit 00:56, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, obvious NFCC#8 failure: not the object of sourced commentary. This would only be legitimate if something in the visual details of the plan was being discussed as indicative of the architect's creative work. That is not the case. As it is, it is mere decoration. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:51, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Camp on pooh soi dao.jpg

Orphan image with no encyclopedic value. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 02:48, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:CeraStaudacher.jpg

Orphan image with no encyclopedic value -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 02:51, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:CesarGomez.jpg

Orphan image with no encyclopedic value -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 02:51, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chelariu Sergiu (Ro.sense festival2007).jpg

Orphan image with no encyclopedic value -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 03:02, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chaung at the beach.JPG

Orphan image with no encyclopedic value -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 03:02, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:L.B.Nagar Chowrastha.jpg

I already transferred it to commons... Srikar Kashyap (talk) 05:11, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Massoud and Qadir 2.PNG

Non-free TV screenshot showing two Afghan warlords shaking hands in 2001, in a civil war alliance against a common enemy (the Taliban). Second nomination after a severely faulty first deletion process (nominated 16 April 2012, majority vote for keep on the basis of blatantly politically motivated "I like it" votes; closed – by myself – as delete on the basis of invalidity of the keep votes under NFC policy; deletion overturned at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2012 April 25). This needs to be revisited for the following reasons:

The first debate failed to address the NFC issue of blatant over-use. This was claimed for as many as six articles (Afghanistan, Taliban, War in Afghanistan (2001–present), Civil war in Afghanistan (1996–2001), Ahmad Shah Massoud, Haji Abdul Qadir), all with identical generic rationales. (I've now reduced the FURs to the latter three).
The fact remains that despite all "I like it" votes, the image fails NFCC#8. The uploader claims that it is used to "illustrate a unique historical moment of peace (and thereby contribute significantly to the article(s)". This is false on two levels at once:
- It fails the usual criterion that the absence of the image would be detrimental to the reader's understanding. The scene "Abdul Qadir and Massoud met and shook hands" is easily described in words and does not require visual illustration to be understood. This is in line with innumerable precedents at FFD, where we have consistently upheld the principle that an historical scene such as a political meeting does not get an illustration merely because the historical event is important. It gets illustrated if and only if something in the visual detail is demonstrably important for understanding it.
- The assertion that this is an historical important, pivotal scene is itself unsourced and unsubstantiated. This, too, was not taken into account in the earlier debate. The uploader, a well-known tendentious agenda editor, has spammed this image across multiple articles in an obvious attempt to promote one of the persons involved, Massoud, as a national hero, and seems to have been successful at persuading some FFD voters with his personal assertion that this is a key symbolic scene in the history of the country. In reality, there is absolutely no indication that it is. Neither the image itself, nor the event it depicts (the specific meeting between the two leaders) is the object of any sourced commentary. While the fact that the two men were both part of the Northern Alliance is mentioned (along with several other, more prominent leaders), there is not a single word of commentary in any of the six articles in question about this particular meeting, and, much more importantly, there is also not a single reliable source talking about it. (To forestall a misunderstanding: from the uploader's description one might be led to believe that it shows some decisive historic moment of reconciliation, e.g. the moment the two forge their alliance. That doesn't seem to be the case. Qadir returned to Afghanistan to join the alliance in 1999. This picture was taken in 2001. We don't know what exactly it shows – not even the uploader has bothered to tell us, and as I said there are no sources – but it seems to have been some routine meeting.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:41, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The copyright holder has allowed the use of the image for educational purpose only on all Afghanistan-related wikipedia articles. The image, strikingly fulfilling NFCC#8 as User:Jimbo Wales said ("In a case like this, we should realize the educational value and learning impact of actually seeing the two leaders shaking hands"), depicts a unique moment and period of peace in the long history of Afghanistan. The image is of immense symbolic value for the promotion of trans-ethnic peace in Afghanistan. BECAUSE:

Already before, but even more when the Taliban came to power, Afghanistan split along ethnic lines.

source: split along ethnic lines

“The popularity of the Taliban during the first several years was not shared by most urban dwellers and Afghan moderates. These included ethnic groups in the countryside, such as the Hazaras and the Tajiks – traditionally at odds with tribal Pashtuns who make up the bulk of the Taliban." (Killing the Cranes: A Reporters Journey Through Three Decades of War in Afghanistan, by Edward Girardet, p. 307)

This led to horrible ethnically-motivated warfare especially from the side of the Taliban.

sources: ethnic cleansing

"Fighters and commanders of Afghanistan's Taliban militia committed systematic massacres ... These are the same type of war crimes as were committed in Bosnia" and should be prosecuted in international courts, said a UN official." (Chicago Tribune, October 2001, http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2001-10-12/news/0110120312_1_taliban-fighters-massacres-in-recent-years-mullah-mohammed-omar)

"... the Taliban advance toward Mazar-e-Sharif destabilized the social structure of the region and caused a severe ethnic cleansing. The Taliban opened fire on the non-Pushton civilian residents ..." (The Rise of the Taliban in Afghanistan: Mass Mobilization, Civil War, and the future of the region, by Neamatollah Nojumi, p. 161)

"Conflict in Afghanistan seems to have become increasingly defined in ethnic terms, which suggests that Kalashnikovization has contributed to ethnic cleansing and even genocide there." (Afghanistan's endless war: state failure, regional politics, and the rise of the Taliban, Larry P. Goodson, p. 100)

“From 1999 onward, the Taliban increasingly adopted a policy of collective punishment against non-Pashtuns. … Various international human rights reports refer to one mass killing after another against non-Pashtuns during this period. ...Arab militans [allied to the Taliban] murdered hundreds of civilians captured in United Front areas, often by slashing their throats or cutting their heads.”(Killing the Cranes: A Reporters Journey Through Three Decades of War in Afghanistan, by Edward Girardet, p. 310)

Beginning in 1999, Pashtuns, Tajiks, Hazaras and Uzbeks started to work more closely together. From 2000 onwards a process was started to unite the ethnicities. In 2001 - THE EVENT PRESENTED IN AND SYMBOLIZED BY THE IMAGE - , the most prominent Tajik and Pashtun (as well as the Hazara and Uzbek) leaders of Afghanistan opposed to the Taliban finally all came together in one meeting and decided to end the ethnic divide and cruelty in Afghanistan and to move forward in a unified manner towards a democratic system and free elections. The video from which the image derives is from the official French media archive. The media archive clearly identifies the meeting as the meeting of the different ethnic leaders of Afghanistan. ("Bout à bout de rencontres entre chefs des différents groupes ethniques") People familiar with Afghanistan will recognize today's President Hamid Karzai there, senior Hazara leaders including todays Vice President Khalili, etc. Since the most prominent and important leaders as indentified by below sources were on the Pashtun side Abdul Haq and his brother Abdul Qadir and on the Tajik side Ahmad Shah Massoud (then representing the Hazaras and Uzbeks also), the screenshot chosen was the one depicting Abdul Qadir and Ahmad Shah Massoud.

About the event shown in the French media archive video from which the image derives: "Massoud brought together Afghan leaders from all ethnic groups. They flew from London, Paris, the USA, all parts of Afghanistan, Pakistan, India. He brought them all into the northern area where he was." (Massoud, by Marcela Grad/Webster University Press, p. 65)

"This grand Pashtun-Tajik alliance might finally persuade the American government to change its policy [towards Afghanistan]." (Ghost Wars, by Pulitzer Price winner Steve Coll, p. 558)

"The ‘Lion of Kabul’ [Abdul Haq] and the ‘Lion of Panjshir’ [Ahmad Shah Massoud] ... Haq, Massoud, and Karzai, Afghanistan’s three leading moderates, could transcend the Pashtun—non-Pashtun, north-south divide.” (The Wars of Afghanistan: Messianic Terrorism, Tribal Conflicts, and by Peter Tomsen, p. 566)

“Massoud recommended that the interim government selected by the loya jirga reestablish an Afghan army and prepare a democratic constitution. Nationwide elections would follow. “As I see it,” he said, “all favor a constitutionally based, democratic central government that will support social justice. … Political parties will contest elections and represent their communities at the center. All ethnic groups should have a place in the interim government.” (The Wars of Afghanistan: Messianic Terrorism, Tribal Conflicts, and by Peter Tomsen, p. 572)

The significance of that new "grand Pashtun-Tajik alliance" as Steve Coll called it for peace in Afghanistan is expressed also by Peter Tomsen saying, it "could transcend the Pashtun-non-Pashtun, north-south divide." The significance of the leaders involved is known by every Afghanistan expert:

sources: significance of the leaders

Abdul Haq and his brother Abdul Qadir

“Haq had won a reputation as a Pashtun commander defending Islam during the anti-Soviet jihad. … his fame as a commander enlarged his political following outside his tribe and region. … Haq’s network of spies was much larger, reaching into the upper levels of the Taliban. Increasing number of Pashtun Taliban were secretly contacting him as Taliban popularity trended downward. … That is why the ISI had forced Haq out of Pakistan …Haq told me that he was already in touch with the Karzais. They were both part of Zahir Shah’s ‘Rome Group’ of Afghans planning a loya jirga to select a new Afghan leadership to stand against their anti-Taliban activities. … Haq explained that he was communicating by radio with Massoud …” (The Wars of Afghanistan: Messianic Terrorism, Tribal Conflicts, and by Peter Tomsen, p. 565)

"Gunston travelled to meet Haq and his commanders in Rome that month, and later told me he was astonished by the alliance of Afghans Haq had managed to build. "It's crazy you have this today," he said, "yet in Rome there were Pashtuns, Tajiks, Uzbeks, Hazara leaders. They were all ready to buy in to the process. . . to work under the king's banner for an ethnically balanced Afghanistan."" (The lost lion of Kabul, in The New Statesman, http://www.newstatesman.com/international-politics/2011/11/haq-afghanistan-taliban-kabul)

“Qadir’s credentials as a prominent leader representing the eastern Pashtun (as against Karzai who is a southern Pashtun) as well as an anti-Taliban force in the United Front and a mujahideen leader against the Soviet occupation were critical in Karzai’s political juggling act [post 9/11]. However, Qadir was assassinated in broad daylight in early July 2002, which constituted a major set-back to Karzai’s efforts to create a stable government and assure the Afghans and the international community …” (South Asia in the World: Problem-Solving Perspectives on Security, Sustainable Development and Good Governance, p. 400)

Ahmad Shah Massoud

"The Afghan who won the Cold War"

(Charlie Rose quoting the Wall Street Jounal, http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2911290068493351924 at 40:50)

"the [Tajik, Hazara, Uzbek and Pashtun] commanders appointed Massoud to be the military commander of all anti-Taliban forces" (The Rise of the Taliban in Afghanistan: Mass Mobilization, Civil War, and the future of the region, by Neamatollah Nojumi, p. 170)

"In the run-up to Afghanistan's October 9 [2004] presidential elections, one man holds a greater political punch than all 18 living presidential candidates combined. Though already dead for three years, Ahmad Shah Massoud, a leader of the Northern Alliance's Taliban resistance, has become the political weapon of choice for both President Hamid Karzai and his top rival in the country's first popularly contested presidential ballot. Since his death on September 9, 2001 at the hands of two al Qaeda-linked Islamic radicals, Massoud has been transformed from Tajik mujahedin to national hero -- if not saint. Pictures of Massoud, the Afghan-Tajik mujahedin who battled the Soviets, warlords, and the Taliban for more than 20 years, vastly outnumber those of any other Afghan including those of Karzai. This year, the Massoud cult reached new heights with a September 8 ceremony in Kabul's National Stadium attended by more than 20,000 people ...”
(Central Eurasia Project of the Open Society Institute;

http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/insight/articles/eav101304.shtml)

Post 9/11, that "grand Pashtun-Tajik alliance" which included the Hazaras and Uzbeks also led to the establishment of a government which all parties accepted and upon that alliance relative peace was built in Afghanistan until 2004 when the Taliban started their insurgency. Today, as NATO troops are going to leave Afghanistan, we again have a situation which might cause a break-up of Afghanistan and a civil war along ethnic lines. Therefore above historical facts are of such importance and the image in question if of such symbolic value for the promotion of trans-ethnic peace and collaboration.

"Alienated by discussions between President Karzai and the Pakistani military and intelligence officials, minority leaders are taking their first steps toward organizing against what they fear is Mr. Karzai’s long-held desire to restore the dominance of ethnic Pashtuns, who ruled the country for generations. ... “Karzai is giving Afghanistan back to the Taliban, and he is opening up the old schisms,” said Rehman Oghly, an Uzbek member of Parliament and once a member of an anti-Taliban militia. “If he wants to bring in the Taliban, and they begin to use force, then we will go back to civil war and Afghanistan will be split.” ... There are growing indications of ethnic fissures inside the army. President Karzai recently decided to remove Bismullah Khan, the chief of staff of the Afghan Army, and make him the interior minister instead. Mr. Khan is an ethnic Tajik, ... One recent source of tension was the resignation of Armullah Saleh, the head of Afghan intelligence service and an ethnic Tajik. Mr. Saleh, widely regarded as one of the most competent aides, resigned after Mr. Karzai said he no longer had faith that he could do the job. Along with Mr. Khan, the army chief of staff, Mr. Saleh was a former aide to Ahmed Shah Massoud, the legendary commander who fought both the Soviet Union and the Taliban. ... “Karzai has begun the ethnic war,” said Mohammed Mohaqeq, a Hazara leader and a former ally of the president. “The future is very dark.”

New York Times, June 2010, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/27/world/asia/27afghan.html?pagewanted=all

further sources: danger of renewed war along ethnic lines

"The NFA is a bloc of leaders from three major non-Pashtun communities -- the Tajiks, Uzbeks, and Hazara -- all of whom opposed the Taliban and Pakistan during the 1990s and remain hostile to both. As Karzai apparently seeks to hold on to executive power, the NFA is pushing for an overhaul of the country's political system. It advocates restructuring Afghanistan as a parliamentary democracy with proportional representation and locally-devolved power -- both of which would benefit non-Pashtuns. Karzai, an ethnic Pashtun, seeks a political settlement with the three major insurgent factions -- all Pashtuns as well -- led by Mullah Muhammad Omar's Afghan Taliban. But the NFA, as well as a large bloc of parliamentarians from a diverse assortment of ethnic groups and political parties, are hostile to talks with the Taliban, and will at the very least demand a meaningful role in the peace process."
(Foreign Policy, March 2012, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/02/03/the_coming_civil_war_in_afghanistan)

"This is the first time that the leadership of the Tajik, Uzbek and Hazara communities [of Afghanistan] has come to a common line of thinking ... In essence, the Northern Alliance is being resuscitated as a political entity." (Asia Times, Jan. 2012, http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/NA12Df01.html)

"I would say there's a greater than 75 percent probability of civil war and the thing just disintegrating." (Huffington Post, April 2012, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/25/daniel-davis-afghanistan-civil-war_n_1453625.html)

THE IMAGE symbolizes the period when for the first time since the destructive wars in Afghanistan began serious and concrete steps were taken to unify the ethnicities. Senior Afghanistan analysts such as Pulitzer Price winner Steve Coll describe it as the "grand Pashtun-Tajik alliance" (which also included the Hazaras and Uzbeks). Senior diplomats and regional experts such as Peter Tomsen said this "could transcend the Pashtun—non-Pashtun, north-south divide". There exist some images which show even more of the leaders involved in the grand alliance, but there is no permission of the copyright holder to use them or the copyright holder is unknown. As outlined above, peace between the ethnicities is once again at risk in Afghanistan. As such, this image whose use is explicitly allowed by the copyright holder, fulfills the extremely important task of promoting trans-ethnic peace in Afghanistan. JCAla (talk) 10:49, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

... and where in this ridiculously long quote farm describing your political motivation is there a reliable source that says that this picture is symbolic of anything? And where is the reliable source that talks about this particular meeting between Massoud and Qadir? Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:55, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt you were able to read all the sources in 5 minutes, which is the time it took you to comment on my statement. I won't even comment on you simply disregarding consensus two times, casting a supervote and your repeated incivility not just against me but also other editors involved in this discussion. JCAla (talk) 11:08, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, indeed, I only skimmed through them, because what you wrote gave me no reason to expect anything in it would be relevant. I saw enough to understand that none of the quotations contained the only thing that would be relevant here: a reliable source explicitly discussing this particular image. Admit it: you have none. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:11, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Open your eyes and you will see two reliable sources explicitly dealing with the event at hand and three further sources explaining the immediate context of the event as well as the importance of both the event and the context. JCAla (talk) 11:20, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy close as keep. Please accept the result of the deletion review with good grace. If the DRV had overturned the close to "no consensus", then a renomination would have been acceptable. It did not. The defective close has been struck out and amended to "keep", and when something's kept at FFD, you don't get to renominate it for deletion on the next day.—S Marshall T/C 11:11, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I gave a very clear explanation why the earlier debate was defective. This is a legitimate new nomination. Any XfD can be revisited at any time if there are new arguments that the earlier one did not consider. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:13, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - With respect, you've had the opportunity to make these points in two recent debates now. You've had two weeks to introduce new arguments. A third try and a third week in a fresh debate is quite acceptable. You are not entitled to WP:KEEPLISTINGTILITGETSDELETED. Also, your nomination statement for this debate is unnecessarily bitter and too full of rancour directed at "keep" !voters and the original file uploader; it's not conducive to a collegial and reasoned debate. I realise you feel strongly that this file should be deleted, but on Wikipedia, sometimes debates don't go the way you think they should go. Please accept this now.—S Marshall T/C 11:21, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:LogoWSPA.png

Orphaned, superseded by File:World Society for the Protection of Animals Logo.svg —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:48, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 140: / Line 140: @@
 *'''Speedy close''' as '''keep'''.  Please accept the result of the deletion review with good grace.  If the DRV had overturned the close to "no consensus", then a renomination would have been acceptable.  It did not.  The defective close has been struck out and amended to "keep", and when something's kept at FFD, you don't get to renominate it for deletion on the next day.—[[User:S Marshall|<font face="Verdana" color="Maroon">'''S Marshall'''</font>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 11:11, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 ** I gave a very clear explanation why the earlier debate was defective. This is a legitimate new nomination. Any XfD can be revisited at any time if there are new arguments that the earlier one did not consider. [[User:Future Perfect at Sunrise|Fut.Perf.]] [[User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise|☼]] 11:13, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
+*** With respect, you've had the opportunity to make these points in two recent debates now.  You've had two weeks to introduce new arguments.  A third try and a third week in a fresh debate is quite acceptable.  You are not entitled to [[WP:KEEPLISTINGTILITGETSDELETED]].  Also, your nomination statement for this debate is unnecessarily bitter and too full of rancour directed at "keep" !voters and the original file uploader; it's not conducive to a collegial and reasoned debate.  I realise you feel strongly that this file should be deleted, but on Wikipedia, sometimes debates don't go the way you think they should go.  Please accept this now.—[[User:S Marshall|<font face="Verdana" color="Maroon">'''S Marshall'''</font>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 11:21, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 ====[[:File:LogoWSPA.png]]====