Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 October 2
October 2
[edit]- 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 Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 10:03, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Joe Moore (KHON).jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Baricom (notify | contribs).
- Fair-use image of a living person, merely used to identify that person. Blueboy96 01:14, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Fails WP:NFCC#1 as its an image of a living person, where a free alternative exists or can created. Additionally, it lacks a fair use rationale. — ξxplicit 03:16, 2 October 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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Agnes release me music video.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Flakes (notify | contribs).
- This file fails to meet our WP:NFCC policy. Specifically, it does not meet point eight of the policy as the file does not add significantly to readers' understanding of the article and its omission would not be detrimental to that understanding. With three screenshots provided in this single file, it is also in excessive use of non-free content. — ξxplicit 03:24, 2 October 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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Everwillbe.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Priveledge (notify | contribs).
- orphaned, no target article/use; UE Skier Dude (talk) 05:32, 2 October 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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Farmers' Science Congress.pdf (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Kvkpanniyur (notify | contribs).
- orphaned, no need to host congress' report (.pdf), UE Skier Dude (talk) 05:54, 2 October 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.
- 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 08:04, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:AnnoyomousEraser.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by SRE.K.A.L.24 (notify | contribs).
- orphaned, too small to be of any encyc use Skier Dude (talk) 06:06, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete User's request. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 06:54, 2 October 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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- OR, LQ, UE Skier Dude (talk) 06:13, 2 October 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.
- 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⚡ 03:02, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Orphaned file, no foreseeable encyclopedic use. — ξxplicit 06:22, 2 October 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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Gowravshekar.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Gowravshekar (notify | contribs).
- orphaned personal image, no other encyc. use Skier Dude (talk) 06:42, 2 October 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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:HK chimera resized.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Kehrbykid (notify | contribs).
- orphaned, appears resizing didn't erase blank area Skier Dude (talk) 07:03, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Go ahead and delete it... I completely forgot it existed. Thanks! Kehrbykid (talk) 01:52, 4 October 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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Havin-Fun-.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by MrHouseMusic (notify | contribs).
- orphaned, no target given, UE Skier Dude (talk) 07:09, 2 October 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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- orphaned, UE Skier Dude (talk) 07:47, 2 October 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.
- 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, F10. Blueboy96 13:31, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Math225 test2.pdf (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Drewster1829 (notify | contribs).
- No need to have someone's math test (.pdf) here Skier Dude (talk) 07:58, 2 October 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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- low quality, wrong rotation Skier Dude (talk) 08:05, 2 October 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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- OR, UE Skier Dude (talk) 08:09, 2 October 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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Nate rhine.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Naterhine1 (notify | contribs).
- OR, UE Skier Dude (talk) 08:11, 2 October 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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- OR, UE Skier Dude (talk) 08:14, 2 October 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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- OR, UE Skier Dude (talk) 08:14, 2 October 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.
- 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:03, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:2007 UEFA Champions League Final logo.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Lapost (notify | contribs).
- If this image didn't appear on the page, would there be anyone who would not then understand the article? I think not. Therefore, this image fails WP:NFCC#8. Stifle (talk) 08:19, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Conditional keep - If a section about the logo can be added to the article, as in 2009 UEFA Champions League Final, then WP:NFCC#8 may be satisfied. – PeeJay 21:52, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - doesn't significantly add to the reader's understanding. PhilKnight (talk) 10:06, 12 October 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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:What Was That For.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Numbuh 463 (notify | contribs).
- OR, UE Skier Dude (talk) 08:21, 2 October 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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- OR, UE Skier Dude (talk) 08:23, 2 October 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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:RINIK.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Riniksarkar (notify | contribs).
- OR, UE Skier Dude (talk) 08:27, 2 October 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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Zim&Luigi.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Igglybuff63 (notify | contribs).
- OR, UE, derivative Skier Dude (talk) 08:36, 2 October 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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Gensiro Kawamoto.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Baricom (notify | contribs).
- Fair-use image used solely to identify a living person. Blueboy96 13:28, 2 October 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.
Chinese government images (part 1)
[edit]- 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 all. PhilKnight (talk) 19:16, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:PLA Type 07 Combat & Training Uniforms.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Henrickson (notify | contribs).
- File:PLA Type 07 Summer Uniforms.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Henrickson (notify | contribs).
- File:PLA Type 07 Woodland Camouflage Pattern.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Henrickson (notify | contribs).
- File:PLA Type 07 Officers Uniforms.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Henrickson (notify | contribs).
- No source URL given, and the licence tag, which purports a PD release by one "Pabloding179 of MilitaryPhotos.net" is suspect. This sort of photograph is almost impossibly to shoot by anybody but a People's Liberation Army photographer, who is unlikely to post his works on an American website under the name of "Pabloding179". Moreover, the standard http:/www.MilitaryPhotos.net disclaimer is to the effect of "noncommercial use only". Sandstein 18:07, 2 October 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.
Chinese government images (part 2)
[edit]- 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 all. PhilKnight (talk) 19:16, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:PLA Navy Type 07 Sailor Uniforms.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Henrickson (notify | contribs).
- File:PLA Ground Force Type 07 Male Summer Uniform.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Henrickson (notify | contribs).
- File:PLA Type 07 Female Summer Skirt Uniforms.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Henrickson (notify | contribs).
- File:PLA Type 07 Urban & Desert Camouflage Uniforms.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Henrickson (notify | contribs).
- File:PLA Ground Force Type 07 Female NCO closeup.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Henrickson (notify | contribs).
- The licencing tag, "This file is in the public domain, because it is a photo published officially by the Chinese PLA, which is not copyrighted and is part of public domain", is manifestly incorrect. The PD conditions for PRC government works are documented at Commons:Template:PD-PRC-exempt, and these photos do not appear to meet them. Sandstein 18:19, 2 October 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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Non-notable picture of a notable police confrontation, copied from a news source, used to illustrate a paragraph about the police confrontation. Damiens.rf 19:16, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- And by the way, source link gives me a 404. --Damiens.rf 19:18, 2 October 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.
- 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; nominator's argument is not too nitpicky, IMO. Copyright law is complicated, and unless an image is explicitly released into the public domain, I don't believe that it can be considered to be PD. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 22:38, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:MarketSite Studio.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Baricom (notify | contribs).
- Fake licensing info. No such permission. Damiens.rf 19:29, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Why fake? If you follow the source link, you'll see photographs with that precise licensing info. (Change the number in the url to see a few more, all with the same status, and several very similar to this one). The site apparently no longer has this precise photograph at the original url, which isn't surprising given it's been several years since this was uploaded, but it seems prima facie plausible it was released in just the same way. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:10, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- There's nothing on the url saying "the copyright holder of this file allows anyone to use it for any purpose". What is actually said is that the image is copyrighted to "The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc."
and that nasdaq.com is using it with their permission. It doesn't follow that anyone to use it for any purpose at all. --Damiens.rf 14:32, 9 October 2009 (UTC)and that it can be reprinted if proper attribution is made. Well, reprinting is not the same as "use it for any purpose". --Damiens.rf 14:35, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]- Hmm, point taken, but that sounds a bit excessively nitpicky to me. If taken in the narrow literal sense, "re-print" would make no sense at all here, because the image isn't printed to begin with. The copyright owners provided it in an electronic form and at a resolution that wouldn't even be technically suitable for printing but only for screen display. Therefore, to interpret the license in a way that makes some sense, it seems safe to assume that by "can be reprinted", they mean to include "can be displayed on a web page". And since they don't add any further conditions about the purpose and context where this can be done (non-commercial, etc.), it essentially boils down to "any purpose". I'd say that's free enough for us. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:53, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- What about derivative works? --Damiens.rf 16:01, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmm, point taken, but that sounds a bit excessively nitpicky to me. If taken in the narrow literal sense, "re-print" would make no sense at all here, because the image isn't printed to begin with. The copyright owners provided it in an electronic form and at a resolution that wouldn't even be technically suitable for printing but only for screen display. Therefore, to interpret the license in a way that makes some sense, it seems safe to assume that by "can be reprinted", they mean to include "can be displayed on a web page". And since they don't add any further conditions about the purpose and context where this can be done (non-commercial, etc.), it essentially boils down to "any purpose". I'd say that's free enough for us. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:53, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- There's nothing on the url saying "the copyright holder of this file allows anyone to use it for any purpose". What is actually said is that the image is copyrighted to "The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc."
- Why fake? If you follow the source link, you'll see photographs with that precise licensing info. (Change the number in the url to see a few more, all with the same status, and several very similar to this one). The site apparently no longer has this precise photograph at the original url, which isn't surprising given it's been several years since this was uploaded, but it seems prima facie plausible it was released in just the same way. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:10, 7 October 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.
- 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; WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Fails WP:NFCC, and the examples of similar images may need to be nominated for deletion, too. Ditto for the nominations below. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 22:41, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The image fails WP:NFCC 1, as it is a non-free image of a living person, when a free alternative can be taken or found. Mifter (talk) 20:52, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The living person in this case is portraying a fictional character, and the purpose of the image is to portray that character. The actor (or actress) does not appear in character outside of the filming studio, so a free alternative is not available. There is precedent for this, although I'm not sure where I've seen it. Maybe check the image used in the Liz Lemon article as an example. Thanks. Pigby (talk) 02:46, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Since the actor is not in costume, makeup, or otherwise different in appearance to the character, this image indeed illustrates nothing that a free image would not. Stifle (talk) 13:07, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Just some fair-use precedent from other articles... all without significant costume/makeup or setting to significantly alter their appearance:
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] Pigby (talk) 20:44, 8 October 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.
- 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:03, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The image fails WP:NFCC 1, as it is a non-free image of a living person, when a free alternative can be taken or found, and an image of the actor/actress would provide sufficient context. Mifter (talk) 20:53, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The living person in this case is portraying a fictional character, and the purpose of the image is to portray that character. The actor (or actress) does not appear in character outside of the filming studio, so a free alternative is not available. There is precedent for this, although I'm not sure where I've seen it. Maybe check the image used in the Liz Lemon article as an example. Thanks. Pigby (talk) 02:46, 3 October 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.
- 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:03, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The image fails WP:NFCC 1, as it is a non-free image of a living person, when a free alternative can be taken or found, and an image of the actor/actress would provide sufficient context. Mifter (talk) 20:53, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The living person in this case is portraying a fictional character, and the purpose of the image is to portray that character. The actor (or actress) does not appear in character outside of the filming studio, so a free alternative is not available. There is precedent for this, although I'm not sure where I've seen it. Maybe check the image used in the Liz Lemon article as an example. Thanks. Pigby (talk) 02:46, 3 October 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.