Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 August 21

< August 20	August 22 >

August 21

File:Chidejika.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: speedy delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:08, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete per self-nomination by uploader. I uploaded image in good faith (from http://chidejika.co.jp) as the logo to accompany an article on the organization. It turned out to be a parody of its actual logo, and a proper image of the actual logo now accompanies the article. Please help me speedy delete this one. Thanks. --AuthorityTam (talk) 20:53, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the bad to the left and the good to the right... File:Chidejika.jpg File:Chidejika.png.
That's what I get for not looking closely enough. I need more sleep, mates. --AuthorityTam (talk) 20:56, 21 August 2009 (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:Offutt-atlantis.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: not deleted and it should be pointed out that "assume good faith" does NOT mean "assume that nobody accidentally made a mistake". --B (talk) 02:54, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Offutt-atlantis.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Americasroof (notify | contribs).

Not found on source. No evidence of being a work of a fed agent. Damiens.rf 00:34, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When the photo was originally posted it had a comment that it was an official USAF photo. The event was more than two years ago and that is the reason it is no longer there. Americasroof (talk) 00:47, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another site showing the USAF attribution on the photo http://origin2.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,287740,00.html Americasroof (talk) 00:52, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, seems like a perfect example of needing to AGF — not saying that you're "behaving badly", Damiens — and trust that the "another site" is more evidence of the USAF origin of the image. Nyttend (talk) 16:49, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Funny to see AGF being mentioned in the same phrase as "you're behaving badly". Take a shower before calling stinky. --Damiens.rf 16:58, 21 August 2009 (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:Giuseppe Nirta.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 Seresin (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:06, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Giuseppe Nirta.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by DonCalo (notify | contribs).

Not found on source, no evidence this is a booking photo. Damiens.rf 00:37, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, as [1] claims it's a mugshot. — PyTom (talk) 05:18, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine, but why is it not replaceable with a free image? Stifle (talk) 20:23, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
According to the rationale on the image, it's because he's in jail. That seems a reasonable rationale to me.— PyTom (talk) 05:23, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-free image of living person. Stifle (talk) 08:16, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, it is a mugshot, I adapted the source where it is clearly stated it is mugshot by the Carabinieri. - Mafia Expert (talk) 12:30, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine, but why is it not replaceable with a free image? Stifle (talk) 20:23, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, it's definitely a mugshot. Even if it's not a mugshot, there is no need for deleting it. It can be used under fair use terms in the article for identification purpose. Just change the licensing info. SantiagoMatamoros (talk) 07:22, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Except that we don't generally accept non-free images of living people used for identification purposes. Stifle (talk) 20:23, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I question whether any effort has been made to acquire a libre-licensed photograph (either a new one, or asking the copyright holder to relicense) in lieu of a non-free one prior to using the latter? — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 23:04, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A mugshot qualifies as fair use if it is used to depict the subject's jailing; then, a free replacement obviously doesn't exist. However, it cannot be used solely for identification purposes. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:11, 29 August 2009 (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:KordaChicken.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 G7 by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:11, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:KordaChicken.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Franklin.vp (notify | contribs).

Stupid picture by prankster user. Damiens.rf 02:37, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the deletion of this picture. At the beginning, when I uploaded it, I thought it was a good idea but latter I realized it was not so. Also the picture in itself is not quite good. Now, I don't find it fair you calling me prankster. Look at my other editing and uploads. I have been posting good quality pictures of Niagara Falls, the CN Tower of Toronto, of Algonquin's Park and (although people think it is a bad intentioned prank) food photography. KordaChiken was a picture in a series I made inspired in Che but I agree that it doesn't quite fit for wikipedia. I guess that wikipedia admins have to deal with thousands of vandalism but I see not reason to even in this cases use aggressive language. I think this is part of the code of ethics wikipedia. Again, the picture in itself is not stupid but I agree that it fits better with the rest of the series and not in wikipedia. Frank cheValier on a Pc (talk) 13:00, 21 August 2009 (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:Saw Videogame Screen 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 Seresin (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:06, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Saw Videogame Screen 2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by GroundZ3R0 002 (notify | contribs).

Non-free image used in Saw (video game). Fails WP:NFCC#8 - the image's omission from the article would not be detrimental to a reader's understanding. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 05:07, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as this is only used to illustrate the game's story. — PyTom (talk) 05:14, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as this is one of the better images that demonstrates setting for the game, and is beneficial in furthering reader understanding and knowledge of the game. A necessary image, along with the other one I voted to keep. Having the two I voted to delete gone, this would keep the article from being an "Image Farm" and have an appropriate amount of good images that are very beneficial to the article. GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 06:43, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, fails WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8. Stifle (talk) 08:17, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, shows readers how the "close up" function of the game works to allow to easier completion of tasks presented. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.206.96.113 (talk) 09:44, 27 August 2009 (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:Saw Videogame Screen 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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Saw Videogame Screen 4.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by GroundZ3R0 002 (notify | contribs).

Non-free image used in Saw (video game). Fails WP:NFCC#8 - the image's omission from the article would not be detrimental to a reader's understanding. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 05:07, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as this is only used to illustrate the game's story. — PyTom (talk) 05:14, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it has been advised that having too many images makes the article less useful as it becomes an "Image Farm". As this is one of the less beneficial images to the article, deleting this out of necessity to keep a few other images on the article alive. GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 06:35, 21 August 2009 (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:Saw Videogame Screen 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 this discussion was: Keep. Discussion closed by GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 06:47, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Saw Videogame Screen 3.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by GroundZ3R0 002 (notify | contribs).

Non-free image used in Saw (video game). Fails WP:NFCC#8 - the image's omission from the article would not be detrimental to a reader's understanding. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 05:07, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as this is used to illustrate gameplay, and is the only illustration of it. — PyTom (talk) 05:16, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as this does effectively demonstrate gameplay and it would, albeit slightly, detriment reader understanding and overall knowledge. GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 06:33, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Saw Videogame Screenshot1.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 G7 by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:04, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Saw Videogame Screenshot1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by GroundZ3R0 002 (notify | contribs).

Non-free image used in Saw (video game). Fails WP:NFCC#8 - the image's omission from the article would not be detrimental to a reader's understanding. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 05:07, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as this is only used to illustrate the game's story. — PyTom (talk) 05:15, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it has been advised that having too many images makes the article less useful as it becomes an "Image Farm". As this is one of the less beneficial images to the article, i vote for deleting this out of necessity to keep a few other images on the article alive. GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 06:35, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

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:THH.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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:THH.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Morninggloryseed (notify | contribs).

Tagged for several months as having chemical problem, unused in any article. File:Tetrahydroharmine (small).svg is viable replacement that resolves given problems. DMacks (talk) 05:32, 21 August 2009 (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:Rhizoxin.svg

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: speedy delete per WP:CSD#G7. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:38, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rhizoxin.svg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Zephyris (notify | contribs).

Chemically incorrect (tagged for 3 months). Unused in any article (File:rhizoxin.png is viable and apparently correct alternative). DMacks (talk) 05:38, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support deletion, this image is factually incorrect stupidity on my part :) Though it would be nice to have an .svg version of the chemically correct one... - Zephyris _Talk 15:12, 21 August 2009 (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:John Batiste votevets video.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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:John Batiste votevets video.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by R. Baley (notify | contribs).

Neither fairuse rationale is appropriate. For John Batiste, it's simply a replaceable image of a living person, in an article where a free image is already available. For VoteVets.org, it's clearly decorate to this video. There is nothing to indicate that its presence significantly increases readers' understanding of the topic, and that its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. Ricky81682 (talk) 08:56, 21 August 2009 (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:05.holding hands.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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:05.holding hands.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Dopeyword (notify | contribs).

Don't see the use, orphaned, unencyclopedic Zoo Fari 17:58, 21 August 2009 (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:1980prescountymap.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: Moved to commons / deleted. Problem solved. --B (talk) 17:36, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:1980prescountymap.PNG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Supertrouperdc (notify | contribs).

Not used, have been replaced by File:1980prescountymap2.PNG. Sherool (talk) 12:16, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I would think this would be potentially useful to retain (on Commons, not here if it isn't being used). The two maps have different purposes - this one shows a straight winner or loser and the other is a heat map. So it isn't like this one is rendered useless by its replacement. --B (talk) 19:30, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:18, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with User:B on this one. No copyright concern, and the two images represent different datasets. Other projects may wish to use it. 81.110.104.91 (talk) 16:06, 25 August 2009 (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:NCVYS Exchange Issue 6 front 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 Seresin (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:06, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:NCVYS Exchange Issue 6 front cover.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by AHMECT (notify | contribs).

Image is adding nothing to the article. It is not required, and does not meet non-free content criterion 8. J Milburn (talk) 11:03, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article has been updated to include more information about the background to the image - its design and designer and why this is relevant to the National Council for Voluntary Youth Services' work. AHMECT 12.28, 7 August 2009 —Preceding undated comment added 11:28, 7 August 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:36, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - we choose images that are suitable for the article, not edit the article to make them suitable for the image. 81.110.104.91 (talk) 13:54, 26 August 2009 (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:NCVYS Exchange Issue 5 front 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 Seresin (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:06, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:NCVYS Exchange Issue 5 front cover.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by AHMECT (notify | contribs).

Image is adding nothing to the article. It is not required, and does not meet non-free content criterion 8. J Milburn (talk) 11:03, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article has been updated to include more information about the background to the image - its design and designer and why this is relevant to the National Council for Voluntary Youth Services' work. AHMECT 12.28, 7 August 2009 —Preceding undated comment added 11:30, 7 August 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:36, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - we choose images that are suitable for the article, not edit the article to make them suitable for the image. 81.110.104.91 (talk) 13:54, 26 August 2009 (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:1970 - Everybody's Got The Right To Love (Alternate Cover).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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:18, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:1970 - Everybody's Got The Right To Love (Alternate Cover).png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by JonathanLGardner (notify | contribs).

Alternative cover is not discussed, nor is it of any importance. Use of a non-free image is not justified. J Milburn (talk) 21:03, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This cover is quite different to the other. If a caption were added, to say when or where this alternative cover was used, i.e. clarifying whether it was widely distributed and/or replaced the original, then an argument could be made to keep it. Jheald (talk) 10:41, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A caption would not be enough. In order to pass WP:NFCC#8 it probably would need (sourced) critical commentary discussing the cover(s) in a way that showing the other cover was needed for readers' understanding. —teb728 t c 23:42, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not true. Showing the identifying cover of a sufficiently significant release or re-release is in itself considered to add significantly to the understanding a reader gets from the article. See eg the largest run (10 Jan) of decisions on alternate album covers. Jheald (talk) 04:10, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:06, 21 August 2009 (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:Jjjjjjj.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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:04, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jjjjjjj.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Leefon (notify | contribs).

Claimed to be created by the user who uploaded it but looks like it may have been copied from a website (although I've checked the satellite imagery on Google Maps, Bing Maps and Yahoo Maps and this doesn't match any of them). Unused and unlikely to be used in any articles. snigbrook (talk) 00:01, 22 August 2009 (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:Jjjjjjjjjjj.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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:04, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jjjjjjjjjjj.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by I.countinfives (notify | contribs).

Unused and unencyclopedic, and probably uploaded for use in article that was speedily deleted per CSD A7. User has no other non-deleted edits. snigbrook (talk) 00:01, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Orphaned file, no encyclopedic use. — Σxplicit 04:57, 22 August 2009 (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.