Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2007 July 13

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


July 13[edit]

Image:Japanese Battleship Kii.gif[edit]

Image:Japanese Battleship Kii.gif (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by SFX_1 (notify | contribs).


Image:DreamTicketsFinal.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Mgoldstein89 (notify | contribs).
  • Orphan image. Pages that did use this logo were removed via CSD. — Mdwyer 01:09, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Guards TRF.PNG[edit]

Image:Guards TRF.PNG (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Hammersfan (notify | contribs).


Image:Zuma_Dogg.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Me2me (notify | contribs).
  • Orphaned, was only used in article deleted for lack of notability.  But|seriously|folks  05:19, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Jennifer dupont.jpg[edit]

Image:Jennifer dupont.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Oysterhurxley932 (notify | contribs).
  • Since you guys are deletion-crazy with the crowning moments, I expect this won't stand a chance. Guess what? I'm getting vindictive (in other words, fails NFC #1 & #2 — PageantUpdater 06:20, 13 July 2007 (UTC).


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


Image:OHA_Cup_Presentation.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by DMighton (notify | contribs).
  • Non-free, decorative use, not needed to show that the guy won an award, not usable to illustrate the person – Quadell (talk) (random) 11:34, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:ON_slogan1.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by JanLuk (notify | contribs).
  • I think this image could be replaced by a free one. Why would you want to? Well, then, it's also merely decorative. – Quadell (talk) (random) 11:37, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Ogopogo_examiner_mq.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Tristam (notify | contribs).
  • Full-page ad. Ads have a good claim for "fair use", legally, but I think its use here is merely decorative. – Quadell (talk) (random) 11:45, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:1101850107_400.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by TMC1982 (notify | contribs).
  • Magazine cover used to illustrate person – Quadell (talk) (random) 11:47, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, needs fair use rationale - The magazine cover is used with commentary of the subject of the cover itself, being that Mr. Ueberroth was Man of the Year. Wouldn't the cover have to be at the top of article to establish that it is used for ID purposes? --CRiyl 00:51, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
  • In one article, there is exactly one sentence about this TIME magazine issue. In the other, it isn't mentioned at all. NFCC#8 requires that the image contribute substantially to the article. – Quadell (talk) (random) 23:39, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Official_souvenir.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Mrmanhattanproject (notify | contribs).
  • Poster, used decoratively I believe – Quadell (talk) (random) 11:47, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:OliverMandic.png (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Zvonko (notify | contribs).
  • Decorative, no encyclopedic purpose – Quadell (talk) (random) 12:11, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Wiwi.JPG (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Entre-Nos (notify | contribs).
  • Image is a pixel for pixel cropped horizontal flip of Image:Awilda Carbia.jpg. The latter image was originally uploaded by the same uploader as the former image. When the latter image was uploaded, the uploader tried to claim the image was PD because it was published in the U.S. before 1923, an impossibility due to the subject not having been born until 1938. The latter image was updated with a fair use tag (but no source) indicating it to be a promotional photo. Due to our fair use policies on images of living people, the image was removed from the article it was used on. Subsequent to this, User:Entre-Nos uploaded Image:Wiwi.JPG, claiming "It's a portrait of Awilda Carbia digitized by myself, with the persmission of the photographer, Erick Borcherding, a Puerto Rican photographer, and released to public domain. It's a resized small photo" Given the source, I seriously doubt this is the case and this image constitutes a copyright violation. — Durin 13:52, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi Durin. Thank you for your concern, but it's unnecessary. Why do you doubt it's true? Do you have a reason to sustain your statement? It's a totally public domain photo. There's no problem with it. It's not featured in any website. It's in my documents. So, if deleting again the picture is your desire, it's ok. I'll find another one, but believe me, this is a matter of opinion and interpretation. No hassle. I don't like arguments. I just contribute with articles and images in good faith. I donate my knowledge and images for history. It's never been my style to violate. Never crossed my mind. I know there are a lot of spammers and violators, but I'm not one. I appreciate your investigations for the people that deserve it. In my case, it's out of the question. Keep up the good work, and believe me, I'm for real, not a hacker. Best regards.--Entre-Nos 22:20, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
If you truly have permission from the photographer to release it to the public domain, please forward such communication to the OTRS system. Thank you. howcheng {chat} 16:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete both or one Agree with original nominator. I just ran the two through photoshop and overlayed a horizontal flip of one onto the other, they are infact identical there is no way that could occur naturally. Uploaders words do not comfort me either, given their earlier comments claiming it was pre-1923... right... in clearly post 50's clothing... in colour... WikipedianProlific(Talk) 20:01, 15 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Moctobot.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Kazztawdal (notify | contribs).
  • Orphaned image of zero ENC. use — Pedro |  Chat  14:57, 13 July 2007 (UTC).


Image:Beardsley_Belt_Buckle.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Gpscholar (notify | contribs).
  • Orphaned, Absent uploader, likely Copyright violation - while copyright on the original work has expired, it is likely that the copyright on both the belt buckle derivative work and the photo of such are held by studio925, the creator of the belt buckle BigrTex 16:08, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Artstar_prew.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Haraldszeeman (notify | contribs).
  • Orphaned, Absent uploader (only remaining contribution), likely Unencyclopedic - uploaded for {{prod}}ed Ondrej Brody BigrTex 17:35, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:J11Acockpit.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Dickhooker (notify | contribs).
  • Non-free poster used in an article to depict the object in the poster, not the poster itself. howcheng {chat} 17:37, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Looks like perfect fit for fair use - there is no free image available, and poster itself was designed to promote aircraft. 10:04, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete These non/partial-english posters at a low resolution have very little use in the encyclopedia. Its a very technical piece of art but not in any way we can use it. I'm also against unessessarily putting semi-advertising style poster pics into the wiki where its avoidable. WikipedianProlific(Talk) 19:55, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Per nom. John Smith's 12:40, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Season1madtv.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by DrBat (notify | contribs).
  • Non-free image of a TV series cast not necessary to the articles it is in. Could be replaced by individual shots of each actor. howcheng {chat} 17:48, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
    • It illustrates the original cast members and how they appeared in the first season. --DrBat 18:37, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
      • And how is that significant? howcheng {chat} 18:43, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
        • The fact that they're the original cast? --DrBat 00:07, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
          • Individual, free images of each actor/actress should then be just as significant. Delete. Anrie 21:45, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
          • As a group? --DrBat 13:21, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
            • You could make a collage out of individual actor photos. Is there some reason they need to be shown as an ensemble? howcheng {chat} 16:07, 15 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:P_Dakar.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Buron444 (notify | contribs).
  • Non-English ad, only used decoratively – Quadell (talk) (random) 18:07, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Very limited use and advertising. Its use is unessessary. WikipedianProlific(Talk) 19:55, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep it's being used to show the advertising surrounding the event. The only way to do that is to show the ad itself, and I'm sure they don't mind the free publicity. -N 19:58, 15 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Spike_t_album_cartoon.JPG (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Howdoustop85 (notify | contribs).
  • Orphaned, Absent uploader, questionable public domain release, little context to determine where/if it could be used BigrTex 18:08, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Prayerbox.JPG (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Howdoustop85 (notify | contribs).
  • Orphaned, Absent uploader, questionable public domain release, not enough context to determine encyclopedic value BigrTex 18:09, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:P&S.PNG (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by TJJohn12 (notify | contribs).
  • Non-free images of people as dolls. No encyclopedic use. – Quadell (talk) (random) 18:09, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


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


Image:PMRC.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Spark (notify | contribs).
  • In the rationale, it is claimed "Not replaceable as 1) a group photo is not likely to be arranged again 2) the women will no longer look as they did in 1985 during the PMRC events". However I think text and free images would replace this image adequately. – Quadell (talk) (random) 18:16, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
  • I'm the uploader, actually (Audacity (talk · contribs)). Quadell, text alone clearly cannot replace this image, so I assume you are saying that it could be replaced by four individual photos of the members. Even if individual photos were of equal value, I doubt that they could be obtained for any of the members other than Gore, because Gore is the only one of the women who is notable outside of her role in the PMRC events, and thus photographs of the others are unlikely to be available outside of those taken during the PMRC controversy (I added the second half of that sentence to the rationale). Thus I say Keep. Λυδαcιτγ 20:27, 13 July 2007 (UTC) Howcheng is right; I don't know the copyright holder. Delete. Λυδαcιτγ 20:21, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Copyright holder is unknown, making this a violation of WP:NFCC #10. howcheng {chat} 17:02, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
  • The PMRC, most likely. -N 20:27, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
  • But is "most likely" good enough? Template:Non-free promotional states that "The copyright for it is most likely owned by the company who created the promotional item or the artist who produced the item in question; you must provide evidence of such ownership. Lack of such evidence is grounds for deletion." Λυδαcιτγ 20:42, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Text1904.png (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Homefryes (notify | contribs).


Image:Pagetheremin.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by IrisKawling (notify | contribs).
  • Decorative, blurry, replaceable if needed – Quadell (talk) (random) 18:25, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Pakistan_Association.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Wowaconia (notify | contribs).
  • blurry, text could describe just as well – Quadell (talk) (random) 18:35, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Tearsofsunwillis.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Nehrams2020 (notify | contribs).
  • Non-free film screenshot not being used in actor's article without any criticial commentary on the scene being depicted. howcheng {chat} 18:43, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete I put the image up for speedy deletion, as the article now makes no mention of the image and the film already has an image of Willis in another scene. --Nehrams2020 23:07, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Bm2_start.gif (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Hucz (notify | contribs).
  • Orphaned, likely either Copyright violation or Unencyclopedic BigrTex 19:00, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

MPorrazzo images[edit]

Nine related images, please see this page. (If I should not have done it that way, please notify me and I will do the work of fixing it.) Tualha (Talk) 19:17, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Chabon.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Vanzorn (notify | contribs).
  • copyvio, used as a joke I think – Quadell (talk) (random) 19:21, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Why is this not fair use? I own the photograph—I paid for it. Michael Chabon User:Vanzorn

Why not pretend to be Jonathon Leathum instead?
  • Delete This photo must be speedily deleted. It violates Paramount Pictures copyright. Every photo taken pays a royalty fee to Paramount. This photo from a Star Trek conventions paid a royalty to Paramount. You can make a copy of it for your own use but may not display it for any purpose. The only exception is if you claim fair use and you are using the photo in a news article to convey information or you are a fan club and displaying the information as such.
The problem with the photo is that the person that took the photo of the person and added the person to it, does not have the rights to make a copy either, so you cannot bestow those rights if you do not have them to begin with. I have a good deal of knowledge about how this law and it is applied by Paramount. The only way it could be kept, is by getting a release from Paramount Picture under fair use. They will not allow GDFL get it because someone else could crop the person out of the photo and then use this photo as a free image. Even the stars when they sign at the convention, pay a fee to Paramount for each glossy and there is a copyright notice on each. It is true the notice is missing from this photo but the original that you were added to is copyrighted. Now, if the person were added to the photo with the wax figures, it would be a completely different story. They are on public display. If this person is notable and the article is notable. Call Paramount for a release.

Also, this is not a screen capture from TV. It was actually created by the 35 mm film and then altered. At the convention the new head is added.

This head can be of anyone. Need proof it is actually who it is stated, it is for notability.akc9000 (talk contribs count) 09:53, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:QaF-(US)-cast.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Bratboyz (notify | contribs).
  • cast photo, could be replaced by actor photos and text (or screenshots) – Quadell (talk) (random) 19:36, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep I see logic behind nomination but unless we have those individual cast pictures to hand and unless someone is willing to upload them and maintain them then one picture is better than 10 seperate ones. It saves hard drive space and makes it easier to keep an eye on the picture, its caption etc. I dont really see why a deletion would be best. WikipedianProlific(Talk) 19:58, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. First of all, hard drive space is not a problem, so that should almost never be the basis of any keep/delete arguments. One image may be easier to maintain etc. but ten separate free images will serve the exact same encyclopedic purpose (to show what the actors look like), so that makes this fail WP:NFCC #1. howcheng {chat} 16:49, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:La_health_lauren.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Laurenjones (notify | contribs).
  • No evidence that it was released as cc-by Abu badali (talk) 19:50, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Lauren_Lorraine_Jones.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Laurenjones (notify | contribs).
  • No evidence o cc-by licensing Abu badali (talk) 20:10, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Mark_j.png (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Laurenjones (notify | contribs).
  • No evidence of cc-by licensing Abu badali (talk) 20:11, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Mark_jacobs_director.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Laurenjones (notify | contribs).
  • No evidence of cc-by licensing Abu badali (talk) 20:13, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Lauren_jones_high_quality_image.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Laurenjones (notify | contribs).
  • No evidence of gfdl licensing Abu badali (talk) 20:14, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Lauren_jones_19.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Laurenjones (notify | contribs).
  • Orphan, no evidence of gfdl licensing Abu badali (talk) 20:14, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Sugababes03.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Stealthusa (notify | contribs).
  • User has uploaded many unfree images and claimed them as his own. I have no reason or faith to believe this one is also owned by this user. — -N 20:44, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Danai_Varveri2.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Mallaccaos (notify | contribs).
  • Unnecessary unfree image of a free diver free diving. Doens't seem to add any new noteworthy information. Abu badali (talk) 20:47, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:M-leroy.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Oysterhurxley932 (notify | contribs).
  • Copyright unknown. nndb is not source. Abu badali (talk) 20:48, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Marina_Papaelia.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Mallaccaos (notify | contribs).
  • Unnecessary non-notable unfree image showing a Miss being crowned, used to illustrate the information that she was once crowned. Not much different of the cases throughly discussed in many nominations at June 18 and at a June 29 deletion review Abu badali (talk) 20:52, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment: That image would be so much better if she had fangs. – Quadell (talk) (random) 21:04, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Filipinos.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Christopher_Sundita (notify | contribs).
  • Claimed to be free, but it's a collation containing unfree material. Abu badali (talk) 21:00, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Sorry for reverting your edit, I wasn't assuming good faith, thinking it wasn't serious. But the images in question are all in public domain, so I'm not sure why they're up for deletion. --Chris S. 05:26, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
    • Nevermind. I realized that the Philippine government's public domain images are treated as if they weren't. Forgot about the bruhaha several months ago. I guess it's delete then. Argh. --Chris S. 05:32, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
      • The Philippine government has sucky lawyers. What they legally refer to as "public domain" is, in fact, copyrighted. It's enough to make a wonk's head explode. – Quadell (talk) (random) 23:44, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:CharlesMoskos2.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Mallaccaos (notify | contribs).
  • Unnecessary unfree images showing a man at a microphone. Abu badali (talk) 21:06, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Katy_Garbi_Live.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by CyprusPlace2b (notify | contribs).
  • Unnecessary unfree image showing a singer singing. Abu badali (talk) 21:21, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:KaterinaMichalopoulou.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Mallaccaos (notify | contribs).
  • Unnecessary unfree image showing threee women smiling. It adds no noteworthy information that can't be conveyed by a free alternative Abu badali (talk) 21:29, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Antigone_Costanda4.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Mallaccaos (notify | contribs).
  • Unnecessary non-notable unfree image showing a Miss being crowned, used to illustrate the information that she was once crowned. Not much different of the cases throughly discussed in many nominations at June 18 and at a June 29 deletion review Abu badali (talk) 21:33, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Dakides.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Mallaccaos (notify | contribs).
  • Magazine cover used to illustrate the article on the person depicted on the cover Abu badali (talk) 21:36, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Marlain.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Mallaccaos (notify | contribs).
  • Magazine cover used to illustrate the article on the person depicted on the cover Abu badali (talk) 21:37, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Throneroomlivescreenshot.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Jgcarter (notify | contribs).
  • Unfree image showing a singer singing, doesn't seem to add any noteworthy information that isn't already conveyed with text Abu badali (talk) 21:47, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Liveinnyscreenshot.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Jgcarter (notify | contribs).
  • Unnecessary unfree image showin some singer singing. Fails WP:NFCC #8 Abu badali (talk) 21:51, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Image:Young_Jackie_Chan.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Kylohk (notify | contribs).
  • Unnecessary non-free image used to show "to show what Chan looked like at a very young age" (!) Abu badali (talk) 22:20, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Sounds quite important to me, unless you can find a free image of that famous person form that approximate age? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  22:36, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
    Why is it important to show what Chan looked like at that approximate age? --Abu badali (talk) 23:24, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
    Childhood is an important part of a person's life, childhood photographs are inherently significant. Most biographies published in society have at least one childhood photo of the person in question.--Kylohk 00:58, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep I agree this photo tells us a tremendous amount about chan. After all, a picture tells a thousand words. It shows us his parents for one, not just what he looked like at a young age. Secondly it shows us he probably had a good upbringing. There are lots of other details it shows that are not worth going into. I see the nominators logic behind the IfD but I think this is very useful, i'd love to see it stay in the article. WikipedianProlific(Talk) 19:52, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
    What he looked like at a young age is not encyclopedic relevant. Most biography articles (Jackie Chan included!) does not discuss how the person looked like at a young age. The " shows us he probably had a good upbringing..." is speculation and original search. If we want to say in the article that he had a good upbringing, we need verifiable sources, and not a posed family photo. --Abu badali (talk) 15:26, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. The omission of this image from the article would not impair the reader's understanding in any way (WP:NFCC #8). howcheng {chat} 16:52, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
    • Hmmm.... You say it's not significant, I say it's significant. So, it's now personal opinion now.--Kylohk 00:39, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
      • It's not about personal opinion. We have a criteria for defining significance in these cases: The image must be necessary for the article's comprehension. Or put in another way, the article should be that someone reading it without that image, would immediately think "But where can I find a posed picture of a 3 years old Jackie Chan with his parents? I'm really curious now!" --Abu badali (talk) 02:25, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
        • Keep Image is related to his childhood or early life, so it's relevant.
  • Delete. Ack Howcheng. Anrie 09:27, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Doesn't matter now, I've replaced that image with a photograph of Jackie Chan performing as a stuntman in Bruce Lee's Fist of Fury. Now, this image doesn't even satisfy criterion 7, since it's not used in any articles.--Kylohk 06:44, 22 July 2007 (UTC)