Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 October 11

< October 10	October 12 >

October 11

File:SandmanDreamertag.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Low quality Calliopejen1 (talk) 01:51, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:OP-1508.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image failing WP:NFCC#8 was removed from two articles and subsequently challenged (and thus here we are). On Scout (passenger train), it was contended to fail WP:NFCC#8 because it is not necessary to show a non-free illustration of a train where it is not in a special route-specific paint scheme to understand the concept that it used rolling stock typical of the period. In Otto Perry, the image is contended to fail WP:NFCC#8 because while it is an image by Otto Perry, it is also a random photo - not anything that is recognized by third party sources as being anything special beyond something else in the photographer's body of work - thus decorative. SchuminWeb (Talk) 02:58, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not that interested in Scout (passenger train) because I would tend to agree that there's nothing distinctive in the consist (other than, perhaps, the locomotive) that even identifies the railroad, much less the train. As far as Otto Perry is concerned, you appear to be trying to set up a unreachable standard. With perhaps the exception of O. Winston Link, there's probably no 20th century photographer of the railroads who is strongly associated with one or two particular images. Therefore your argument seems to be that we can't supply any sample image for any of them because we can't (or at least haven't) identify one special image. I don't know that I would have picked this particular image, but I'm disinclined to accede to a theory that we cannot pick a sample image. Mangoe (talk) 14:45, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- And new information discovered about the library's current stance on the images and its collection (see #Various Denver Public Library images) mean that we can't use them due to a failure of WP:NFCC#2, since our usage replaces the market value of the images. A shame, but those are the breaks, I'm afraid... SchuminWeb (Talk) 19:48, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - That point is disputed there, and the consensus opinion would prevail here as well. Mangoe (talk) 04:02, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I would also contend that the "unreachable standard" is possibly by design, in that it means that you don't need to include a non-free photo. SchuminWeb (Talk) 06:25, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - - WP:NFCC#2 relates only to "the original market role of the original copyrighted media" which is not at issue with any of these images. Also the Denver Public Library freely provides low resolution versions of the images in its collections which are all downloadable from its website without charge or other restriction. (See the full discussion of this issue at #Various Denver Public Library images below.) Centpacrr (talk) 06:53, 15 October 2011 (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.

File:NREL Photovoltaic Budget History.PNG

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: Delete; deleted by SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, encyclopedic value unclear Calliopejen1 (talk) 03:19, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Hotmk part2.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, superseded by File:Mountain King theme2.png Calliopejen1 (talk) 03:27, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:ShimanoLogo.gif

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: Delete; deleted by SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Low Quality, superseded by File:Shimano.svg , no foreseeable use. FASTILY ^(TALK) 03:35, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Cts-4.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:04, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OR, does not seem useful (inserted in this edit) Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:39, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Cts-5.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, does not seem useful (inserted in this edit) Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:39, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Cts-6.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, does not seem useful (inserted in this edit) Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:40, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Cts-7.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, does not seem useful (inserted in this edit) Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:40, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Cts-9.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, does not seem useful (inserted in this edit) Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:41, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Cts-8.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, does not seem useful (inserted in this edit) Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:41, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Cts-10.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, does not seem useful (inserted in this edit) Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:41, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Cts-11.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, does not seem useful (inserted in this edit) Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:41, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Cts-3.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, does not seem useful (inserted in this edit) Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:41, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Cts-1.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, does not seem useful (inserted in this edit) Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:42, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Cts-2.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, does not seem useful (inserted in this edit) Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:42, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Cts-10.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, does not seem useful (inserted in this edit) Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:43, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Leave me alone.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, no encyclopedic value. Sven Manguard Wha? 04:47, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:LA7.PNG

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Created as an infobox icon for a sportsman, article never made it out of draft stage, hasn't been touched since 2009, so this file will never get used. Sven Manguard Wha? 04:49, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Lake of the dead.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fails NFCC #8 because it is not referenced at all in the text (and there is already a DVD cover in the infobox). Sven Manguard Wha? 04:52, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:NYE04StageshotS.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic (7th Sun) Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:53, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Larvae.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No description or other information to identify what species this is. Sven Manguard Wha? 04:59, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:LAYLA.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned personal photo, upload was user's only contribution to Wikipedia Sven Manguard Wha? 05:01, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Lazarus Easton 01.JPG

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned. No location or description of this generic storefront, therefore no apparent encyclopedic value. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:01, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete seems to be Lazarus (department store) in Columbus, Ohio, but this user has uploaded smallish-resolution images for nearly every Lazarus in the country. Somehow I doubt that he was roadtripping around to take these photos. Will nominate all for deletion as possibly unfree. Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:53, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Lazarus Easton 01.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned. No location or description of this generic storefront, therefore no apparent encyclopedic value. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:02, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete seems to be Lazarus (department store) in Columbus, Ohio, but this user has uploaded smallish-resolution images for nearly every Lazarus in the country. Somehow I doubt that he was roadtripping around to take these photos. Will nominate all for deletion as possibly unfree. Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:53, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:LIGHTS.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, unidentified. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:03, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Line.JPG

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, no description or indication of what the lines represent. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:04, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Line.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Generic line, replicable by wikicode (four dashes). Used only on the userpages of two inactive users. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:05, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Manuel Ramil on Pamplona (On concert).jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, low quality, source indicates copyright, not free release, one of four nearly identical images. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:07, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Manuel Ramil On Pamplona (On concert).jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, low quality, source indicates copyright, not free release, one of four nearly identical images. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:08, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Manuel Ramil on Pamplona (concert).jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, low quality, source indicates copyright, not free release, one of four nearly identical images. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:08, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Manuel Ramil on Pamplona (Concert).jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, low quality, source indicates copyright, not free release, one of four nearly identical images. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:08, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:MC Satanic logo.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, as a logo probably not free. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:09, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:MC Satanic Logo.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, as a logo probably not free. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:10, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Meme.JPG

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, unidentified, possibly a userphoto, user gone since 2007 Sven Manguard Wha? 05:11, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Mim.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, unidentified, possibly a userphoto, user gone since 2010 Sven Manguard Wha? 05:11, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:MixedBreed.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, unidentified, possibly a personal photo, user gone since 2008 Sven Manguard Wha? 05:12, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:DallasDrake.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, low quality, might be the sportsman Dallas Drake, but can't tell. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:13, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Robert Molesworth judge.jpg

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: Withdrawn. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 00:14, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned. Unidentified other than "Molesworth", no source. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:14, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is a photograph of Robert Molesworth (judge), apparently used as the basis for this engraving. I have not located a specific source but the photograph is plainly in the public domain since its subject died in 1890. Mangoe (talk) 13:31, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have updated the tags for this, added it to the article (since the other image has even more dubious provenance) and requested a better filename for it. Mangoe (talk) 13:50, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

- - Withdrawn. Thanks, Sven Manguard Wha? 09:51, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: The file was moved from File:Molesworth.jpg to File:Robert Molesworth judge.jpg by Sven Manguard (talk · contribs) at 09:52, 12 October 2011 (UTC). AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:06, 12 October 2011 (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.

File:Kit left arm palermo3.png

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned/depreciated kit component. Unlikely to be used. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:22, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Kit left arm Palermo3.png

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned/depreciated kit component. Unlikely to be used. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:22, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Kit body NõmmeKaljuHome08.png

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned/depreciated kit component. Unlikely to be used. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:51, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Kit Body CardiffCityHome1112.PNG

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned/depreciated kit component. Unlikely to be used. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:51, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Kit body Nõmmekaljuhome08.png

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned/depreciated kit component. Unlikely to be used. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:52, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Kit body bluestripes blue shoulders.PNG

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned/depreciated kit component. Unlikely to be used. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:52, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:JackRussell.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned. Does not appear to be any of the people at the Jack Russell disambig page. No article on Station Family Fund. Link to statement that supposedly released the image for free is deadlinked. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:55, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Jarvis.JPG

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, no description. Nothing in the edit history right after the upload to indicate image's use. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:57, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:CFF-logo.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan Crops for the Future (talk) 08:57, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Family photograph of James Bulger released after his murder.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fails NFCC#8 and NFCC#3a. Image is not the subject of any discussion in the article, and another image is already used in the infobox, making this one unnecessary. Sven Manguard Wha? 09:05, 11 October 2011 (UTC)* Note: The file was moved from File:James Bulger.jpg to File:Family photograph of James Bulger released after his murder.jpg by Vibhijain (talk · contribs) at 07:37, 15 October 2011 (UTC). AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:05, 15 October 2011 (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.

File:Img 2086.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned userphoto of long gone user. Upload is user's only contribution. Sven Manguard Wha? 09:30, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Inscription.JPG

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned to File:One Ring inscription.svg Sven Manguard Wha? 09:45, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Inside hospital.jpg

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: Delete; deleted as F8 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:06, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned. Name and location of building not identified, so unlikely this can be used. Sven Manguard Wha? 09:49, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and move to commons Based on user contribs, seems to be a Johns Hopkins hospital. Calliopejen1 (talk) 02:57, 12 October 2011 (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.

File:1989 Sports Illustrated Swimsuit cover.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A photo of the cover is being used here for "identification of a magazine issue within an article that provides critical commentary of the contents of the magazine issue". A discussion of the contents of Sports Illustrated is not further explained by the cover of the magazine, any more than a news citation is further explained by the front page of that newspaper on that day. (ESkog)^(Talk) 12:42, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I do not agree. The specific themed issue has a good claim to notability, and the image identifies it; the cover image is even referred to in the text. made moot by further discussion Mangoe (talk) 13:55, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The discussion in the article is about an entirely different page within the magazine. If that page were used, maybe it would meet NFCC, but Kathy Ireland in a bikini has nothing to do with the USC-UCLA rivalry. Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:49, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm skeptical that it would pass NFCC#8, but I see looking at the page edit history that there appears to be some edit warring over both the image and some text that would appear to be discussing it. The currently-deleted text says that this issue was the best-selling issue in the magazine's history, which might perhaps make it pass #8 if true. I'd rather see the content issues resolved at the page, without having an FFD decide the matter. --Tryptofish (talk) 16:02, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I am the uploader. As a background, the picture was included in conjunction with the following article edits to the section "UCLA-USC rivalry in popular culture". I believe it meets WP:NFC #1, "Cover art: Cover art from various items, for visual identification only in the context of critical commentary of that item (not for identification without critical commentary)." The magazine issue's content is being discussed, with a response from SI's managing editor. The picture serves to identify the magazine issue, which is also sourced as being the top-selling issue. Finally, there is a quoted caption from a newspaper that also references the cover, "The SI cover was OK, but page 225 wasn't", which meets: "Images that are themselves subject of commentary." I will also abstain from a keep! vote until the article issues are resolved.—Bagumba (talk) 21:34, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete As the creator. Based on arguments against my original intent to adding a neutral cover picture in lieu of adding the controversial picture from the same magazine issue. —Bagumba (talk) 20:07, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Calliopejen1. – Quadell ^(talk) 12:49, 12 October 2011 (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.

File:Charterhouse Modern Colour Crest.png

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This nomination was ill-formed. The image is orphaned and the tagging is unclear. Note that it was uploaded by an officer of the organization which presumably owns the image. Mangoe (talk) 17:28, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:In Memory.JPG

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned personal photo of long gone user. Sven Manguard Wha? 17:19, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Into the wild.png

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned and unencyclopedic (if user made) or copyvio (if not usermade) Sven Manguard Wha? 17:20, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Hez jump.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, quality too low to be of use. Sven Manguard Wha? 17:23, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Hez jump.JPG

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, quality too low to be of use. Sven Manguard Wha? 17:24, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Heartbeat.JPG

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, no apparent encyclopedic value, possible copyvio (PD-self for bumper sticker design dubious) Sven Manguard Wha? 17:28, 11 October 2011 (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.

Various Denver Public Library images

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. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 00:18, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above listed images are contended to fail WP:NFCC#2. The Denver Public Library's current stand on copyright for their images is listed here, which does not actively promote fair use as claimed on the license tag. In fact, quite the contrary. The failure of WP:NFCC#2 comes in because the library offers its images for sale, and thus by offering them on here, we are not respecting commercial opportunities, as the library charges a fee for online use of its materials, and our using the images for free replaces "the original market role of the original copyrighted media". Thus they all must go, I'm afraid. SchuminWeb (Talk) 19:36, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re File:Victor, c.1905.jpg: KEEP as legitimate Fair Use. I don't think a 40kb thumbnail competes with the library selling hi-res prints of their original negative; we have many other FU images from imageholders who sell hi-res copies. The Denver Public Library's change of heart re fair use doesn't affect US copyright law.

I'm pretty sure DPL's attempt to charge for online use of their images wouldn't apply to legitimate Fair Use under US Copyright law (17 U.S.C. §107), but perhaps this question should be referred to the Foundation's lawyer?

Note: The copyright status of this particular image is unclear. It is probably PD by expiration of the original copyright. See File:Victor, c.1905.jpg for the details. Pete Tillman (talk) 20:23, 11 October 2011 (UTC), original uploader.[reply]

Just because the Denver Public Library has a physical print of a particular image does not mean that it also "owns" exclusive (or any) copyright to original image itself as well no matter what that institution might claim, or that if they do they can arbitrarily claim that such an image is exempt to the fair use (as opposed to commercial) provisions of the US Copyright law (17 U.S.C. §107). Also it is questionable whether or not this library (which is a taxpayer funded public institution managed by the Denver Library Commission, an entity of the government of the City of Denver) can retroactively withdraw already granted fair use access to these images to subsequently exploit them (as essentially public property) for the institution's commercial gain. Furthermore the sourcing on some of the files' host pages indicates that while housed at the Denver Public Library, these images may have been accessed through the Library of Congress. So whether or not they fail WP:NFCC#2 does not seem to be at all clear. Centpacrr (talk) 20:45, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If the library is licensing usage rights for the images, it is very likely that they are indeed actually the lawful rights holders for these images. If they weren't, they would likely end up in very hot water legally when the real rights holders sued them. Also, regarding public institutions and copyright in the US, only the federal government is automatically public domain. Works belonging to state and local governments are not automatically in the public domain. So I have no reason to believe that they are not the lawful rights holder, and that means the images fail WP:NFCC#2. SchuminWeb (Talk) 23:10, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re File:Dining car interior c 1927.jpg, this image is not entirely unique and a new photograph showing the same information can be freely obtained elsewhere. Heck, I could probably ask a few friends of mine at any of three railroad museum near me to help with a reenactment of a similar scene. So, while I am disappointed in the interpretation of how the policy applies to this image, I'm sure we can find or create something to replace it that is within current WP policy. I have not reviewed the other images and do not have an opinion on the others yet. Slambo (Speak) 20:48, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Let's be clear - whether or not the Library 'encourages' fair use is totally irrelevant. Dlabtot (talk) 00:31, 12 October 2011 (UTC) Also, the assertion that "All images from the Denver Public Library collection are copyright © protected and may not be reproduced in any way without permission from the Denver Public Library." is clearly nonsense, as copyrights DO expire. Dlabtot (talk) 00:34, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP ALL The Library says it has prints of 30,000+ images in its collection for which it also "claims" to be the copyright holder for every one. While that is indeed a common "claim" made by many libraries and museums, it is also preposterously overbroad as it is very unlikely that any of these institutions actually created any of them. In addition, the Library represents them as being mostly old and historic images acquired largely through donations (such as with the "Otto C. Perry Memorial Collection of Railroad Photographs") from a very wide variety of sources and of which additional copies of almost all also doubtless exist and are in the possession of many other individuals and/or institutions as well. (That being the case, what gives the Denver Library an exclusive claim to the copyright of an image over all other owners of copies of the same image?)

A considerable percentage of the images are also quite likely to have always been (or are now) in the Public Domain. While many are no longer copyrighted, if potentially still copyrightable their creators and/or original copyright holders are unknown and/or unknowable, and/or any previous copyright claim has been abandoned. The Denver Public Library's blanket claim to be the legitimate copyright holder to every unique or non-uinque copy of an image it did not create (i.e. was not the original legitimate copyright claimant) is therefore completely unsupported unless they can affirmatively prove otherwise.

The only basis that the Library seems to rest its claim of being the legitimate copyright holder to the images in its collections is that they own prints or digital copies ot them. That, however, is not the law. Title 17 U.S.C. §202 (Ownership of a copyright, or of any of the exclusive rights under a copyright, is distinct from ownership of any material object in which the work is embodied.) states: "Transfer of ownership of any material object, including the copy or phonorecord in which the work is first fixed, does not of itself convey any rights in the copyrighted work embodied in the object; nor, in the absence of an agreement, does transfer of ownership of a copyright or of any exclusive rights under a copyright convey property rights in any material object. (See also Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp., 36 F. Supp. 2d 191 (S.D.N.Y. 1999))

A library cannot "claim" to own the copyright of every image for which it "owns" a copy any more than it could do so for every book in its collection. Therefore the Denver Public Library's blanket claim of being the exclusive copyright holder to every image of which it may have a copy is nothing more than that: a self serving "claim" but not proof of anything. Even if the Library is the legitimate copyright holder to some images, however, that still does not exempt them from the fair use provisions of the US Copyright law (17 U.S.C. §107), nor does their use on WP violate WP:NFCC#2 in that the images (such as those listed above) do not in any way "...replace the original market role of the original copyrighted media."Centpacrr (talk) 01:13, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and/or nominate separately NFCC2 is about the original market role of images - i.e. is it replacing the reason they were originally taken? So were these images created so that decades later library archives could license them? (With dubious grounds to do so, as noted above.) Clearly not. NFCC2 is for images like wire images, which were taken for the specific purpose of licensing. Some of these images may fail the NFCC for other reasons (e.g. that map - clearly a similar free map could be created). But NFCC2 is not a reason to delete these. Calliopejen1 (talk) 02:51, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete all~~, although I would prefer that each be nominated separately. As best as I can tell, all of the images come from websites of the Library, where they are offered for sale, and are not offered for free download. Thus, no matter who originally held the copyright, there is presently someone (the Library) that has a commercial interest in selling the images. (And it doesn't matter whether or not editors think that the Library does or does not really have the right to assert that commercial interest – see WP:NEVERSUE.) Thus, they all do fail NFCC#2. (Also, WP:ITSFAIRUSE isn't a sufficient argument to keep.) --Tryptofish (talk) 19:02, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Simply because the Library is offering to provide the commercial service of providing copy prints of the images does not mean it is also their copyright holder. The fees charged are for creating the new print of the image and to cover various administrative costs. It does not, however, give to or imply that the Library has exclusive rights to the image itself under 17 U.S.C. §202, nor does it make them ineligible for fair use under 17 U.S.C. §107. The issue is copyright, not what the Library charges for creating copy prints. Also WP:NFCC#2 is meant to protect "...the original market role of the original copyrighted media", not its subsequent exploitation decades later by a party who has not proved they have any copyright interests in it at all. Centpacrr (talk) 19:29, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, let's stipulate that I'm no lawyer. But it seems to me that if we offer the images on Wikipedia, users can get the images from us for free, instead of paying to get the images from the library, thus denying the library those "administrative costs". I don't think that their website says that people can download their images for free, but it costs if you want the library to generate a print. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:50, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The images as displayed on WP are low resolution (72dpi) and relatively small (less than 800px wide) and thus not suitable for printing. The prints offered for sale by the Library are high res (300dpi) and available in large sizes suitable for display. Consequently using them on WP not only does not "compete" with the Library's print sales operation, it in fact serves to promote it by directing potential customers to their site through hyperlinks. Centpacrr (talk) 23:37, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Would not, then, the library say at their website that one is free to download their images at low resolution? As for us promoting them, WP:NOBODYCOMPLAINED. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:16, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Library indeed does provide free access to small, low resolution downloadable versions of the images suitable for "fair use" display on WP but which could not be used to compete with the commercial reprint operation of the Library. (See, for instance, an example here). Also by "promoting" I didn't mean overtly promoting the Library's commercial print service, only that the source of each image (the Denver Public Library collections) is passively identified and hyperlinked on the image's WP hosting page. This benefits (as opposed to hurts) the Library's rights and interests by directing and permitting anyone interested to freely visit and browse the online collections from which each came originally without charge. While there, they can also find out what additional services the Library provides if they are interested in acquiring a high resolution print for a fee to the Library. This does not constitute "spam" but only the appropriate and necessary identification of the image's digital source required by WP policy. Centpacrr (talk) 21:53, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all. I looked at the link in the comment immediately above, and I changed my mind. You have to look rather carefully, because what stands out at first look is the link to purchasing the image. However, there are a series of icons near the top of the image there, and the right-hand-most one allows you to "clip" the image. When you select that icon, you are given an opportunity to save, copy, e-mail, etc. a low-resolution version. I'm not going to check whether this is also true for all the other files, but I suggest that the nominator re-nominate any of them individually. --Tryptofish (talk) 00:47, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re:File:Train in Limon, Colorado.jpeg While there's a listing for a photo of the station at nps.gov, that one and many, many more images for National Historic Places have not yet been digitized, so there's no download for it. Have found a 1909 postcard view of the station that will qualify as PD-pre 1923. Let me see about uploading it to Commons and post the link to the file for it here when done. We hope (talk) 00:02, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK File:Limon Colorado Railroad Station 1909.jpg is at Commons and on the Limon Railroad Depot page. Since this removes a photo of the Rocky Mountain Rocket, also uploaded a free use image of the train and added it to the Rocky Mountain Rocket page. We hope (talk) 01:21, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yes, it is relevant if the library says that it encourages fair use — in other words, they don't view a claim of fair use as a threat to their commercial interests. It's vaguely like the images in Category:Fair use media with non-commercial licenses. Nyttend (talk) 12:36, 17 October 2011 (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.

File:P5290102D.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, decorative so probably copyrightable. we have other examples of 3d printing Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:43, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Cowen Group.png

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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons. Please nominate it for deletion there if you still feel it should be deleted. AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:08, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

updated with Cowen_Group.svg

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.

File:Logo - Cowen Group.png

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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons. Please nominate it for deletion there if you still feel it should be deleted. AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:08, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

updated with Cowen_Group.svg

Anping87 (talk) 21:58, 11 October 2011 (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.

File:Grand Theft Riot.jpg

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: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned file, no foreseeable encyclopedic use. The target article, GrandTheftRiot, was speedily deleted four years ago. — ξ ^xplicit 22:43, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Gobonobo ^T ^C 16:38, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: The file was moved from File:GTR.JPG to File:Grand Theft Riot.jpg by Cloudbound (talk · contribs) at 21:00, 16 October 2011 (UTC). AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:11, 16 October 2011 (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.