Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2007 August 20

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

August 20[edit]


Image:Freelbeforedrunkdriving.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Stopprop (notify | contribs).
  • Claims public domain, but no information on photographer given. Also, given the filename this might be intended as an attack on the subject, who was indeed charged with drunk driving. While that fact is relevant to the article, I don't know that including an image about it is really appropriate. W.marsh 23:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Public domain because photographer was a private citizen who happened across Freel at the bar (my friend). The photographer was asked kindly to take the photo and complied, however keeping a copy for himself. Maybe the photo should be retitled because it could be possibly libelous. Also I think that Freel's wikipedia page should be re-done to the outline of other baseball players example:Cole Hamels. stopprop 20:50, 20 August 2007
Image deleted. The image cannot be claimed to be in the public domain without a release from the photographer. -Nv8200p talk 00:26, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Z!D 07.jpg[edit]

Image:Z!D 07.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Zahid89 (notify | contribs).
  • Unencyclopedic. Orphaned. Appears that the only use for this image was for a vanity article. fuzzy510 00:01, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:L 61a5afd6db9715166631f9959a6ee2ab.gif[edit]

Image:L 61a5afd6db9715166631f9959a6ee2ab.gif (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Rap dogg89 (notify | contribs).
  • Orphaned and Unencyclopedic. Of no real use here. fuzzy510 02:19, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


Image:Angry.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Screech123 (notify | contribs).
  • Uploader claims that this image was his own creation (uploaded under GFDL-self), however, it's obvious he didn't create this, as it is included in the copyrighted program Windows Live Messenger. –sebi 03:47, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:FYSIWALOL by jujimufu.gif[edit]

Image:FYSIWALOL by jujimufu.gif (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Jujimufu (notify | contribs).
  • Orphaned and unencyclopedic. I don't even know what the heck this is supposed to illustrate. fuzzy510 04:46, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete just an fyi - it's Finding Your Saying Interesting Without Actually Laughing Out Loud! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nodekeeper (talkcontribs) 11:13, August 24, 2007 (UTC)


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


Image:Helicopter.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Helicopter59 (notify | contribs).
  • Orphaned, and there's no real place to use it, anyway. There's no indication as to what kind of helicopter it is, so it can't be used for illustration that way, and the girl in front of the chopper doesn't make it a very good choice. fuzzy510 05:03, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Isnt even linked into any articles. Should be erased for sure, plus i doubt the girl's parents would want that picture on wikipedia, since she is obviously underage. --Stopprop 00:57, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:High contrastcopyright.png[edit]

Image:High contrastcopyright.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Geni (notify | contribs).
  • Orphaned. Upload description even says that it was just uploaded to test something, which makes me believe pretty strongly that it'll never be used. fuzzy510 05:05, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


Image:Hélou.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Davidcannon (notify | contribs).
  • Why is it under public domain? OsamaK 05:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Lebanese copyright on photos expires 50 years after production - if it's from '56 or earlier it'd be copyrighted, but given when he was president, it seems more likely it was produced in the 1960s - anyone have any insight? Think he might be 43 or younger in that photo? WilyD 13:57, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


Image:Collegeofsocialstudies.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Jdwatson (notify | contribs).
  • Orphan image- Sebvdv 06:06, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


Image:DAT.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by [[User talk:#Image:DAT.JPG listed for deletion|]] ([[[:Template:Fullurl:User talk:]] notify] | contribs).
  • Orphaned, Unencyclopedic- Sebvdv 06:16, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Big font debug screenshot.png[edit]

Image:Big font debug screenshot.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Titoxd (notify | contribs).
  • Orphaned, Can't figure out what it is useful for.- Sebvdv 06:30, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. As the title says, it was for debugging an issue with MediaWiki. It has outlived its usefulness. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 19:17, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:AGP keys diagram.png[edit]

Image:AGP keys diagram.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Windkin (notify | contribs).
  • Orphaned, Can be replaced by Image:AGP & AGP Pro Keying.svg- Sebvdv 06:41, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Goku HighRes.png[edit]

Image:Goku HighRes.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by UzEE (notify | contribs).
    • Copyright violation, derivative work. User copied a copyrighted character from a manga/anime series and claimed the image as their own against all existing copyright laws.- Kariteh 13:00, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
    • All I would like to say is that I made the Image myself. Its not copied. I can provide the source files. UzEE (TalkContribs) 19:26, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
      • I meant "copied" in the sense that it's a copyrighted character. The rights of the owner (Toriyama, Toei Animation or whoever) still apply whether you take a screenshot, a photo, or even when you redraw the character; the rights are not just on the media but also on the design itself. Kariteh 21:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
        • So is there any way it can be improved? I mean a Fair-Use Rationale? UzEE (TalkContribs) 05:34, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
          • I don't think there's really a way. It would actually be better (and more precise from an encyclopedic viewpoint) to use an original copyrighted image than to create a derivative work (see Squall Leonhart maybe for a good example). The only instances where derivative works are (more or less) accepted is when the design is very generic, like with the mushroom icon that the WikiProject Nintendo uses. Kariteh 08:35, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
            • So you are saying that it would still not help if I change the license information to a copyrighted image. I can provide a fair-use rationale with that. UzEE (TalkContribs) 00:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
              • It would be better to use a "real" original image of Goku. A fan-made one isn't precise enough since it's not the original. Kariteh 09:11, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
                • Ok, thanks for the feedback. I guess it would be better to use the original. UzEE (TalkContribs) 00:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Xia class submarine.jpg[edit]

Image:Xia class submarine.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Dziban303 (notify | contribs).
  • Fair use rationale is not nearly detailed enough for Wikipedia's purposes. Is no verification that this is the submarine in question - could be almost anything. John Smith's 14:59, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Jin class.jpg[edit]

Image:Jin class.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Hallo84 (notify | contribs).
  • Fair use rationale is not nearly detailed enough for Wikipedia's purposes. Source is not accessible, as requires registration and appears to be a forum so is not reliable enough to verify this is the submarine in question - could be a fake. Also is not historic at all - looks fairly recent. John Smith's 14:59, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


Image:Jl1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Hallo84 (notify | contribs).
  • Fair use rationale is not nearly detailed enough for Wikipedia's purposes. Source is not accessible, as requires registration and appears to be a forum so is not reliable enough to verify the content. Also is not historic at all - looks fairly recent. John Smith's 15:08, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


Image:JL2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Hallo84 (notify | contribs).
  • Fair use rationale is not nearly detailed enough for Wikipedia's purposes. Source is not accessible, as requires registration and appears to be a forum so is not reliable enough to verify the content. Also is not historic at all - looks fairly recent. John Smith's 15:08, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


Image:Weston_city_of_toronto_113.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Weston ontario (notify | contribs).

Image:Kansas House of Representatives.jpg[edit]

Image:Kansas House of Representatives.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Miles530 (notify | contribs).
  • Obvious copyvio of; photo originally carried a "This work has been released into the public domain by the copyright holder. This applies worldwide" tag, but there is no evidence of such, and someone apparently affiliated with the original source of the website has protested and removed the tag. Nyttend 16:15, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Unless the person who posted this picture defends his post, it should be deleted.

--Stopprop 00:59, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Speedy delete as copyvio (and thanks for spotting this). Carcharoth 02:37, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Lol odex.jpg[edit]

Image:Lol odex.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Question2 (notify | contribs).
  • Bad file name. Content has not yet been verified as an Odex production. Odex Article is an on-going event and may experience controversy. Cocoma 16:59, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Feel free to buy the VCD and verify if you are so concerned that its a conspiracy to discredit Odex. Question2 01:24, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
  • There is no such VCD in the market by odex, its a poh kim production. go look at your VCD box again.Tueac 05:10, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
  • As a passerby with no strong feelings about this Odex debacle, I've nonetheless noted that Tueac seems to have a pro-Odex inclination on Talk:Odex and elsewhere, and am inclined to take his claims with a grain of salt. I'd really like to see solid proof from either side that this image is or is not what it claims to be, such as an official list of Odex releases or a photo of the VCD cover; I was unable to locate such proof myself using Google. If the standard Wikipedia protocol is to automatically delete a suspicious image like this, though, I have no complaints. -Seventh Holy Scripture 05:29, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
  • I'm not Odex inclined but just want the correct information to be present. about the proof of Poh kim being the sole distro of Initial D, here [1] Although this is the Stage 4 rather than the stage 2 and not the VCD cover but there are other example of Poh kim' earlier covers like this [2] with a Poh Kim Logo on the top left side. Other than that and the Odex logo on the back, they almost have the same cover... when compared to this [3]Note: Last picture taken at a Poh kim retail store with Poh kim price tag... Tueac 07:41, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep only if the filename is fixed with an appropriate one, and content has been verified a production of Odex. Cocoma 14:17, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
  • I agree with Seventh Holy Scripture. There may be a possible bias based on judging the screenshots provided under the name "lol_odex". Animeronin 06:00, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


Image:Tv_guide_50_greatest.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Zanimum (notify | contribs).
  • Non-notable magazine cover being used to decorate the Spock article. Delete per WP:NFCC#8. Videmus Omnia Talk 17:52, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Cover is arguably notable--special issue of leading magazine in the medium on "TV's 50 Greatest Characters." Per the image's fair use rationale, "This image is used to illustrate the impact of a fictional character on modern culture." The image serves that valuable purpose very well.—DCGeist 07:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, patent NFCC#8 violation. – Quadell (talk) (random) 01:34, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Query Er...given that judgment of NFCC#8 is entirely subjective, how can any supposed violation of it be "patent"? Maybe a delete argument longer than three words would help clarify your position.—DCGeist 06:14, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


Image:Heinlein-Number-of-the-Beast.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Bogdangiusca (notify | contribs).
  • Non-free book cover decorating the Parallel universe (fiction) article. Not necessary to reader understanding, delete per WP:NFCC#8. Videmus Omnia Talk 17:55, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Book is discussed in detail in article as significant example of a certain type of fictional parallel universe. Image is valuable to reader's understanding of the topic.—DCGeist 07:11, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. The book is discussed (in three sentences*), the cover isn't: how does the book cover aid understanding of those few sentences? --Calton | Talk 13:06, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
  • *The three sentences: "Robert A. Heinlein, in The Number of the Beast, postulated a six-dimensional universe. In addition to the three spatial dimensions, he invoked symmetry to add two new temporal dimensions, so there would be two sets of three. Like the fourth dimension of H. G. Wells’ time traveler, these extra dimensions can be traveled by persons using the right equipment."


Image:DailyShowClinton.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Tertiary7 (notify | contribs).
  • Primary reason: the image doesn't significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic of the article (fails WP:NFCC #8). In the article Bill Clinton it is used as decoration, the television program is not critically discussed or even mentioned in the text. In the article The Daily Show it is used as decoration, the interview is not critically discussed in the text. Secundary reason: no unique fair use rationale with clear purpose of use description for each use of the image. Ilse@ 20:21, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
    Some comments to the nomination. – Ilse@ 07:41, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per action taken I have moved the image in the article on The Daily Show to a more appropriate position, expanded the caption to show exactly when this interview took place, and greatly expanded the discussion of the interview in the article to show the significance of the event illustrated by this image. I have also revised and expanded the fair use rationale to make clear its purpose on The Daily Show (not sure how to deal with syntax of this rationale box to alter box header, but specificity of rationale is clear in box's main text).—DCGeist 18:00, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
    The image does not contain any significant information that is not already in the text, it is merely decoration (fails WP:NFCC #8). – Ilse@ 07:16, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per DCGeist action- thank you Astuishin (talk) 18:31, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Image deleted. Image was of no significance to the article and merely decorative. Fails WP:NFCC #8. -Nv8200p talk 00:36, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


Image:Csu_poster.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Acne m (notify | contribs).
  • a band poster, not discussed in the article, and it contributes no encyclopedic information (at all) – Quadell (talk) (random) 21:44, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


Image:Cubby_cropp.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Machocarioca (notify | contribs).
  • Only used in an article that barely mentions him – Quadell (talk) (random) 21:46, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


Image:Gwen-Stefani-4-In-The-Morning-407004.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Explode24 (notify | contribs).