Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 March 14

< March 13	March 15 >

March 14

Coneball court.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 ⚡ 05:02, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Coneball court.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by MattSal (notify | contribs).

Original research. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 01:06, 14 March 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.

Bdr_vid_pics.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 - per partly excessive use (4 images) and also partly significance. It is most helpful if, when claiming that an image is significant that it is stated how this is the case. "seems to be" is not a clear indication of significantly increasing reader's understanding - Peripitus (Talk) 04:18, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bdr_vid_pics.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Child_Funk (notify | contribs).

Doesn't significantly add to the reader's understanding of the subject. PhilKnight (talk) 14:43, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It shows four different parts of the video put together in one image. It has more use than one single image on the article! --Child Funk (talk) 20:14, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The image does increase the readers understanding and seems to be emphasizing the facts described in the music video. --Legolas ^(talktome) 03:31, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, but because it fails WP:NFCC#3a (use of multiple copyrighted images) rather than for the nominator's reason. Stifle (talk) 09:20, 18 March 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.

Ethelbert.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 ⚡ 05:02, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Doesn't significantly add to the reader's understanding of the article. The image does indicate one of the central character's middle name, however this information could be conveyed by text. PhilKnight (talk) 14:48, 14 March 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.

Geewhizz.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 ⚡ 05:02, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

In the context of several other images which portay the central characters, this doesn't add much. PhilKnight (talk) 14:52, 14 March 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.

Joe_Orlando_by_Guy_Fraumeni.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. A further note is that this type of use is one that is listed under the non-free content "unacceptable uses" examples. - Peripitus (Talk) 03:53, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

In the context of a photograph depicting the subject of the article, this doesn't add much. PhilKnight (talk) 14:57, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Broadly true, but the photo is old and grainy (hardly a surprise), while the caricature includes Orlando's cowboy hat, which I believe was quite a personal trademark. I don't see why the two can't co-exist. ntnon (talk) 01:00, 15 March 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.

Spanish Empire World.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:02, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Spanish Empire World.PNG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by EuroHistoryTeacher (notify | contribs).

By consensus on the Spanish Empire talk page, the map has many problems and is not one that should be displayed on WP. An IP sock of a permanently banned user is constantly readding it so as would be simpler to delete from WP. The user who originally uploaded it has stopped contributing to WP. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick^t 17:01, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI - the same sock has just attempted to remove this posting from this page. [1] The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick^t 19:03, 14 March 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.

Autocad_2009.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:02, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Autocad_2009.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by SoBC (notify | contribs).

Doesn't meaningfully add to the reader's understanding. PhilKnight (talk) 17:42, 14 March 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.

BambiWoods_DebbieDoesDallas_Wikipedia.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: withdrawn Joe 21:02, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Replaceable fair use. Tried speedy and was denied. Person is still alive and there is no reason to think this person is hard to get a picture of. Rockfang (talk) 18:02, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep See File talk:BambiWoods DebbieDoesDallas Wikipedia.jpg, where AnonEMouse wrote, "No, sorry. First, it's at least a photo of a reclusive person, that a team of professionals have tried hard to find and couldn't, so it's not possible to find a photo; in fact, it's debatable whether or not she is still a living person. Second, it illustrates her appearance in the single movie that made her notable, which is not merely used to illustrate her, and that can't possibly be a free image. So not replaceable." So this is a case where a fair-use image is our only option for an image. -- llywrch (talk) 18:45, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Clause 12 of the unacceptable use section of WP:FU: "Pictures of people still alive, groups still active, and buildings still standing; provided that taking a new free picture as a replacement (which is almost always considered possible)" (emphasis mine). As llywrch, the search for Bambi Woods was part of the documentary Debbie Does Dallas Uncovered; they failed to find her. So we do not know if she is still alive, and even if she were still alive, there is no reasonable expectation that a free use photograph would be possible. So this is obviously one of the exceptions to the clause in question. Tabercil (talk) 19:20, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw Tabercil's explanation of someone actually attempting to find her but being unsuccessful makes sense. I am aware of Non-free content policy and guidelines.--Rockfang (talk) 19:42, 14 March 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.

Stefskwl3.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 ⚡ 05:02, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Stefskwl3.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Beaverson (notify | contribs).

no reason to believe this is actually an image of the named person. Uploader name suggests possible vandalism in context of sex worker article. Uploader's history (1 day, 5 edits, disappearance) suggests unreliability of licensing Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 19:45, 14 March 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:JaySeanTonight.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 ⚡ 05:02, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:JaySeanTonight.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Old Money Records (notify | contribs).

Unnecessary non-free image, delete per WP:NFCC#8. GlassCobra 20:28, 14 March 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.

DoukutsuScreenshot.gif

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:02, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:DoukutsuScreenshot.gif (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Dalkaen (notify | contribs).

Deprecated by File:Cavestory.png and orphaned. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 20:52, 14 March 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.