Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 December 27

< December 26	December 28 >

December 27

File:EdgarSnyderPATBusStop.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 ⚡ 01:01, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

OR, very UE, LQ, use not stated. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 00:38, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete billinghurst (talk) 22:57, 27 December 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:Nwflight253.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 00:01, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nwflight253.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Ishwasafish (notify | contribs).

This is a bad fair use rationale. This is a high interest news story and the AP makes money by selling images exactly like this. They are losing out on potential revenue. The picture depicts the whole plane in relatively high resolution. If this were three or four months from now, fair use would make sense. But currrenlty, this jeopardizes the merchantability of this image. Relisted from: [1]I3409234 (talk) 00:38, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree...Too high resolution for an image to be fair use. Spikydan1 (talk) 21:27, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, unless drastic changes are made.username 1 (talk) 00:56, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: high-resolution or not, a boring exterior shot of an aircraft with a stairway rolled up has absolutely no encyclopedic value when the article is about an event that took place inside the aircraft. An editor could take a free image of the aircraft tonight at the airport (weather notwithstanding) and it would have identical encyclopedic value to this article - little to none. --NellieBly (talk) 02:44, 27 December 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:Above Good Me.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 Angusmclellan (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:20, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Above Good Me.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Stellar comet15 (notify | contribs).

OR, UE, LQ, use not stated, possible CV. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 01:42, 27 December 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:Amerrittrush81.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: keep. Not the best quality but it's free and now unorphaned. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 19:48, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Amerrittrush81.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Packerfan22 (notify | contribs).

OR, UE, LQ, use not stated, possible CV. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 01:42, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - found the correct home for it (biographical article with no image) - Peripitus (Talk) 22:32, 3 January 2010 (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:Balacona ed.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 Angusmclellan (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:20, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Balacona ed.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Massaregbari (notify | contribs).

OR, UE, LQ, use not stated, possible CV. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 01:42, 27 December 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:BernadetteSeacrest2006.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 Angusmclellan (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:20, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:BernadetteSeacrest2006.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Bernadetteseacrest (notify | contribs).

OR, UE, LQ, use not stated, possible CV. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 01:42, 27 December 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:Heraldic achievement of Father Guy Selvester by Alexander Liptak.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 as G7 by Xeno (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:12, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Heraldic achievement of Father Guy Selvester by Alexander Liptak.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Xanderliptak (notify | contribs).

Duplicate of File:Coat of arms Fr Guy Selvester-Alexander Liptak .png with watermark. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:44, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The file File:Coat of arms Fr Guy Selvester-Alexander Liptak .png was deleted because it violated my copyright. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 12:02, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Very UE. Also, uploader has made several bogus claims regarding copyright status of file so possible CV. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:37, 28 December 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:Heraldic achievement of John F. Kennedy by Alexander Liptak.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 as G7 by Xeno (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:12, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Heraldic achievement of John F. Kennedy by Alexander Liptak.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Xanderliptak (notify | contribs).

Duplicate of File:Coat of arms Kennedy of Massachusetts-Alexander Liptak .JPG, minus the watermark. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:46, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The file File:Coat of arms Kennedy of Massachusetts-Alexander Liptak .JPG was deleted because it violated my copyright. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 12:02, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Very UE. Also, uploader has made several bogus claims regarding copyright status of file so possible CV. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:37, 28 December 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:Heraldic achievement of Gilbert Edward Greenall, Esq. by Alexander Liptak.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 as G7 by Xeno (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:12, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Heraldic achievement of Gilbert Edward Greenall, Esq. by Alexander Liptak.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Xanderliptak (notify | contribs).

Duplicate of File:Coat of arms Roosevelt of New York-Alexander Liptak .JPG minus watermark. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:47, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The file File:Coat of arms Roosevelt of New York-Alexander Liptak .JPG is not a duplicate of File:Heraldic achievement of Gilbert Edward Greenall, Esq. by Alexander Liptak.png. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 12:04, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The file File:Coat of arms Roosevelt of New York-Alexander Liptak .JPG was deleted for violating my copyright. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 12:04, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Very UE. Also, uploader has made several bogus claims regarding copyright status of file so possible CV. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:37, 28 December 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:Heraldic achievement of Theodore Roosevelt by Alexander Liptak.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 as G7 by Xeno (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:12, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Heraldic achievement of Theodore Roosevelt by Alexander Liptak.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Xanderliptak (notify | contribs).

Duplicate of File:Coat of arms Roosevelt of New York-Alexander Liptak .JPG minus the watermark. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:48, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The file File:Coat of arms Roosevelt of New York-Alexander Liptak .JPG was deleted because it violated my copyright. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 12:03, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Very UE. Also, uploader has made several bogus claims regarding copyright status of file so possible CV. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:37, 28 December 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:Heraldic achievement of the Office of the Lord Lyon King of Arms by Alexander Liptak.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 as G7 by Xeno (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:12, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Heraldic achievement of the Office of the Lord Lyon King of Arms by Alexander Liptak.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Xanderliptak (notify | contribs).

Duplicate of File:Coat of arms Lord Lyon King of Arms-Alexander Liptak .JPG, minus the watermark. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:49, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The file File:Coat of arms Lord Lyon King of Arms-Alexander Liptak .JPG was deleted because it violated my copyright. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 12:05, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Very UE. Also, uploader has made several bogus claims regarding copyright status of file so possible CV. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:37, 28 December 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:Mcdonalds-logo.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: Delete; deleted as G7 by JamieS93 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:14, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mcdonalds-logo.svg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Koman90 (notify | contribs).

This is a user created logo that is not representative of the corporate logo of the McDonald's Corporation. This logo has been uploaded multiple times by the user in question and deleted repeatedly. Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 01:57, 27 December 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:Imnotdeadplatinumedition.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. Angus McLellan (Talk) 01:52, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Non-free image that is so similar to the existing on in the article that the simple differences (background colour and a bit of text) can be easily described with text alone. fails WP:NFCC#1 and WP:NFCC#3a Peripitus (Talk) 07:31, 27 December 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:ADOLF HITLER an appreciation by Eustace Mullins.pdf

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:22, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:ADOLF HITLER an appreciation by Eustace Mullins.pdf (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Adam Holland (notify | contribs).

This file is not linked to any works at Wikipedia. Further, one should question whether this is a work of the US Government. The body of the report would by such, however, this text as an appendix only appeared in the report of a committee. It would seem unlikely that this would extinguish copyright and put the work into the public domain. billinghurst (talk) 10:27, 27 December 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:010405ad.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:010405ad.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esteffect (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:26, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Esteffect/April Fool's Day, 2005. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:06, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. LQ, UE, use not stated. The joke's over; no real need to retain the leftovers. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:44, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:010405ae.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:010405ae.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esteffect (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:28, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Esteffect/April Fool's Day, 2005. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:07, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. LQ, UE, use not stated. The joke's over; no real need to retain the leftovers. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:44, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:010405af.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:010405af.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esteffect (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:28, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Esteffect/April Fool's Day, 2005. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:07, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. LQ, UE, use not stated. The joke's over; no real need to retain the leftovers. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:44, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:010405ah.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:010405ah.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esteffect (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:29, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Esteffect/April Fool's Day, 2005. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:08, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. LQ, UE, use not stated. The joke's over; no real need to retain the leftovers. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:44, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:010405c.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:010405c.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esteffect (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:29, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Esteffect/April Fool's Day, 2005. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:09, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. LQ, UE, use not stated. The joke's over; no real need to retain the leftovers. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:44, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:010405d.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:010405d.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esteffect (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:29, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Esteffect/April Fool's Day, 2005. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:09, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. LQ, UE, use not stated. The joke's over; no real need to retain the leftovers. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:45, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:010405f.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:010405f.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esteffect (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:30, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User talk:Cyde/European toilet paper holder, User talk:Bishonen/European toilet paper holder, and User:Esteffect/April Fool's Day, 2005. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:10, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:010405g.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:010405g.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esteffect (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:30, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Esteffect/April Fool's Day, 2005. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:13, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. LQ, UE, use not stated. The joke's over; no real need to retain the leftovers. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:45, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:010405h.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:010405h.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esteffect (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:30, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Esteffect/April Fool's Day, 2005. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:13, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. LQ, UE, use not stated. The joke's over; no real need to retain the leftovers. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:45, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:010405i.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:010405i.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esteffect (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:30, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Esteffect/April Fool's Day, 2005. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:13, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. LQ, UE, use not stated. The joke's over; no real need to retain the leftovers. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:45, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:010405j.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:010405j.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esteffect (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:30, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Esteffect/April Fool's Day, 2005. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:14, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. LQ, UE, use not stated. The joke's over; no real need to retain the leftovers. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:45, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:010405k.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:010405k.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esteffect (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:31, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Esteffect/April Fool's Day, 2005. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:14, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. LQ, UE, use not stated. The joke's over; no real need to retain the leftovers. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:45, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:010405l.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:010405l.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esteffect (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:31, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Esteffect/April Fool's Day, 2005 and User:BlastOButter42/Junk. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:15, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:010405n.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:010405n.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esteffect (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:31, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Esteffect/April Fool's Day, 2005. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:16, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. LQ, UE, use not stated. The joke's over; no real need to retain the leftovers. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:45, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:010405r.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:010405r.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esteffect (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:31, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Esteffect/April Fool's Day, 2005. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:16, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. LQ, UE, use not stated. The joke's over; no real need to retain the leftovers. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:45, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:010405s.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:010405s.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esteffect (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:31, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Esteffect/April Fool's Day, 2005. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:17, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. LQ, UE, use not stated. The joke's over; no real need to retain the leftovers. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:47, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:010405t.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:010405t.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esteffect (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:31, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Esteffect/April Fool's Day, 2005. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:17, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. LQ, UE, use not stated. The joke's over; no real need to retain the leftovers. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:47, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:010405v.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:010405v.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esteffect (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:31, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Esteffect/April Fool's Day, 2005. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:18, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. LQ, UE, use not stated. The joke's over; no real need to retain the leftovers. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:47, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:010405w.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:010405w.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esteffect (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:32, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Esteffect/April Fool's Day, 2005. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:18, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. LQ, UE, use not stated. The joke's over; no real need to retain the leftovers. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:47, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:010405x.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:010405x.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esteffect (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:32, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Esteffect/April Fool's Day, 2005. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:18, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. LQ, UE, use not stated. The joke's over; no real need to retain the leftovers. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:47, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:010405y.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:010405y.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esteffect (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:32, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Esteffect/April Fool's Day, 2005. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:19, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. LQ, UE, use not stated. The joke's over; no real need to retain the leftovers. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:47, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:010405z.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:010405z.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esteffect (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:32, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Esteffect/April Fool's Day, 2005. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:19, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as copyvio. If I'm not mistaken, the image on the upper ~~left~~right is copyrighted by Monty Python. Chick Bowen 02:20, 28 December 2009 (UTC) (Amended. Don't know my right from my left. Chick Bowen 04:24, 28 December 2009 (UTC))[reply]
Delete. LQ, UE, use not stated. The joke's over; no real need to retain the leftovers. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:48, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project. If the embedded image is a copyright violation, it can be blackout out (with only the infringing revision deleted). Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:100th user editNew Picture123.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:100th user editNew Picture123.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Photoguy439 (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:33, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Photoguy439. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:20, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, has no value being used in a gallery without explanation, could be replaced with text. MilborneOne (talk) 21:16, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:1337-neg1.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:1337-neg1.gif (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Chortos-2 (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:34, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User talk:NawlinWiki/Archive 12. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:21, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:17 article DYK hook.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:17 article DYK hook.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Doug Coldwell (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:34, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Ottava Rima/A, User talk:Gatoclass/Archive 8, and User talk:Ottava Rima/Archive 18. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:22, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:2005Nov TR3 wikipedia files.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:2005Nov TR3 wikipedia files.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Jakob Suckale (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:34, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Jakob Suckale, and User:Jakob Suckale/panel bottom. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:23, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:2008 main page redesign proposal Kollision2.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:2008 main page redesign proposal Kollision2.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Kollision (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:35, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. No benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:2008 main page redesign study Cacycle 800x600 correct.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:2008 main page redesign study Cacycle 800x600 correct.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Cacycle (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:35, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in Wikipedia talk:2008 main page redesign proposal/Cacycle. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:24, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as copyvio, or crop out the logo, reupload, and delete the old version. Chick Bowen 02:24, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The solution is to simply add "logo=yes" to the {{Wikipedia-screenshot}} tag (which I've just done). Therefore... —David Levy 02:43, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:2008 main page redesign study Cacycle 800x600.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:2008 main page redesign study Cacycle 800x600.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by David Levy (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:35, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in Wikipedia talk:2008 main page redesign proposal/Cacycle. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:25, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as copyvio, or crop out the logo, reupload, and delete the old version. Chick Bowen 02:25, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The image was properly tagged with the {{non-free Wikimedia logo}} template (which I've replaced with the screenshot-specific version). Therefore... —David Levy 02:43, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:2008 main page redesign study Cacycle.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:2008 main page redesign study Cacycle.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Cacycle (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:36, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in Wikipedia talk:2008 main page redesign proposal/Cacycle and Wikipedia talk:2008 main page redesign proposal/Archive 4. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:26, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:2008 main page redesign study current 800x600.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:2008 main page redesign study current 800x600.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by David Levy (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:36, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in Wikipedia talk:2008 main page redesign proposal/Cacycle. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:26, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as copyvio, or crop out the logo, reupload, and delete the old version. Chick Bowen 02:25, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The solution is to simply add "logo=yes" to the {{Wikipedia-screenshot}} tag (which I've just done). Therefore... —David Levy 02:43, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:200theditNew Picture (8)y87y.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:200theditNew Picture (8)y87y.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Photoguy439 (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:36, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Photoguy439. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:27, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:010405b.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:010405b.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esteffect (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:37, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in User:Esteffect/April Fool's Day, 2005. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:28, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:'What links here' screen shot 2-28-08 for talk page.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: keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:'What links here' screen shot 2-28-08 for talk page.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Chuck Marean (notify | contribs).

unencyclopedic IngerAlHaosului (talk) 14:39, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, used in Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/February 28, 2008. Sir Arthur Williams (talk) 18:28, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In use within the project; no benefit to deletion. Per a discussion on the nominator's talk page, he/she mistakenly believed that images for use outside of the article namespace were prohibited and that their deletion would free up server space. (Neither belief is correct.) —David Levy 02:32, 4 January 2010 (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:BBCworldident1999.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: Keep Wikiwoohoo (talk) 19:16, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:BBCworldident1999.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Wikiwoohoo (notify | contribs).

History of BBC television idents has too many fair use images. Wikiwoohoo (talk) 20:46, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (for now) Fair use image, no reason for selection of particular image billinghurst (talk) 22:46, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment That an article has too many fair use items would seem to be an issue about the article itself, not the individual images. This should be resolved by other means, and then non-free images that are unused should be deleted by the process that exists for such items. billinghurst (talk)
As to whether the article contains too many images as a whole, I dispute that. (See my comments on the two BBC1 logos below). After all, the very topic of the article is the history of the BBC's idents; and the legal fair use case is overwhelming.

With regard to this particular image, it's nothing particularly stunning; but I think the channel, as the representative of the BBC's global ambition, is significant; and the 1999 image is useful for showing when BBC World adopted the (basically still current) BBC News look, although it is also useful to show how this has subsequently been revised. Therefore, on balance, keep. Jheald (talk) 18:22, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I would also dispute that the article has too many images as a whole - it currently has 32 images describing the development of on-air identities on 9 broadcast channels over a cumulative broadcast period of 172 years; one image for every 6 broadcast years does not seem excessive, particularly as there are many more idents which could have been used. -- Arwel Parry (talk) 01:37, 29 December 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:BBC World 2007.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: Keep. Wikiwoohoo (talk) 19:20, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:BBC World 2007.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Wikiwoohoo (notify | contribs).

See above listing Wikiwoohoo (talk) 20:51, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (provisional) see above billinghurst (talk) 22:47, 27 December 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:BBC-one-1985.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: Keep. Wikiwoohoo (talk) 19:27, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:BBC-one-1985.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Wikiwoohoo (notify | contribs).

See above listing Wikiwoohoo (talk) 20:52, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (provisional) see above billinghurst (talk) 22:47, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The "Computer Originated World" animation (or "COW") was - and to some extent still is - seen as completely groundbreaking. Generated live every usage for six years, it pushed the capability of computer graphics at the time to their limits, and radically dusted-off the BBC's face to the world. (Indeed it still stands up well today). See [2] for a good article on the technology behind it. The reader's understanding is hugely improved by being able to see, and assess for themselves, what is being talked about, and how it compared to what went before and what came after. This image is eminently justified under NFCC #8.

As for the general claim made above, the article does not contain "too many fair use images". It contains an appropriate number of fair use images for the purpose of directly adding to reader understanding of the very topic of the article, namely the History of BBC television idents -- and is in conformance both with U.S. Fair Use law (compare Bill Graham Archives vs. Dorling Kindersley) and with Wikipedia policy. See also discussion on the article talk page. Jheald (talk) 17:58, 28 December 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:BBC-one1991.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: Keep. Wikiwoohoo (talk) 19:41, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:BBC-one1991.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Wikiwoohoo (notify | contribs).

Moved from 28 December to keep discussion of the images together. Jheald (talk) 18:35, 28 December 2009 (UTC) [reply]

History of BBC television idents has too many fair use images and could remove some without losing quality. Wikiwoohoo (talk) 00:51, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The 1991 logo animated ident was kept for six years, through most of the 1990s; and was a significant change of look from the ground-breaking "Computer Originated World" animation which went before; and it was in marked contrast to the much more filmic idents which followed - it is particularly valuable to show what the filmic idents replaced. Contrary to the claim made above, the article does not contain "too many fair use images". It contains an appropriate number of fair use images for the purpose of directly adding to reader understanding of the very topic of the article, namely the History of BBC television idents -- and is in conformance both with U.S. Fair Use law (compare Bill Graham Archives vs. Dorling Kindersley) and with Wikipedia policy. See also discussion on the article talk page. Jheald (talk) 12:22, 28 December 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:BBC World 1997.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: Keep. Wikiwoohoo (talk) 19:45, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:BBC World 1997.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Wikiwoohoo (notify | contribs).

Moved from 28 December to keep discussion of the images together. Jheald (talk) 18:35, 28 December 2009 (UTC) [reply]

History of BBC television idents has too many fair use images. This and others could be removed without affecting the quality of the article. Wikiwoohoo (talk) 18:27, 28 December 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:Itv1-3d.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:22, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Itv1-3d.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Aidsoo (notify | contribs).

Not particularly necessary within the article Wikiwoohoo (talk) 19:55, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:NFCC#8. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:50, 28 December 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:Itv1-jan06.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:22, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Itv1-jan06.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Aidsoo (notify | contribs).

Can be removed from ITV television presentation Wikiwoohoo (talk) 20:09, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:NFCC#8. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:51, 28 December 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.