Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 May 5

< May 4	May 6 >

May 5

File:Jumping (Out the Window) (Remix).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 Tim Song (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3 as multiple non-free files are being used when one would suffice. Additionally, it fails WP:NFCC#8 as the file does not add significantly to readers' understanding of the article and its omission would not be detrimental to that understanding. This cover is not significantly different from the main cover, File:Jumping (Out the Window).jpg, to justify its use. — ξ ^xplicit 00:52, 5 May 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:Antic after winning LaLiga 1996.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 ⚡ 02:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NFCC#8: Missing critical commentary. No apparent significance to the image itself. Mosmof (talk) 01:25, 5 May 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:Otpor FreeYourMind MTV jesen2000.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 ⚡ 02:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NFCC#8: image not specifically discussed on page, appears to be decorative Mosmof (talk) 01:37, 5 May 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:Pacsnoopsuge.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 Tim Song (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3 as multiple non-free files are being used when one could (and does) suffice. Also fails WP:NFCC#8 as it does not add significantly to readers' understanding of the article. — ξ ^xplicit 06:06, 5 May 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:Japanese Birth and Death rates.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 ⚡ 02:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OB, replaced by vector version File:Bdrates of Japan since 1950.svg Demmo (talk) 08:31, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - No use having a raster graph when a vector one is avalible -- Dobz116 (talk) 11:32, 5 May 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:Cap montage.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. OTRS came in from zoptopz.com. OTRS 2010050810027198. Andrew c ^[talk] 01:02, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation this montage is a derivative work of four non free Flickr images, the same users uploads have now been deleted at Commons, however the source images remain on Flickr at [1],[2],[3] and [4] KTo288 (talk) 08:58, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Permission granted - no need to delete - Permission for use of this image has been granted by copyright and image holder and submitted to Wikipedia according to the proper procedure. Do not delete. Rexreed (talk) 23:02, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS pending-KTo288 (talk) 23:12, 8 May 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:RabbitOnGrass.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 ⚡ 02:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Low-quality picture of a rabbit in a field. We have a lot of those pictures, and in this one the rabbit itself is so small that it is unlikely to be useful in any article. Ucucha 14:57, 5 May 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:Isabel 1 lg-1-.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Florida Center for Instructional Technology claim copyright over this "clipartified" version of the image (see http://etc.usf.edu/clipart/1200/1231/isabel_1.htm), on the basis that the modifications make it a new work. It is scertainly not a faithfull reproduction of the original so the claim may have some merit (looks like they mostly just ran it though a "threshold" tool, but whatever). I tracked down something closer to the original and uploaded it unmodified (aside from rotating it) to Commons as File:Isabella of Aragon - psychology of dress.jpg, suggest we replace this with that to be on the safe side (or something derived from it if we prefeer the "cleaner" look of the cleaned up image). Sherool (talk) 16:47, 5 May 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:Nero StartSmart Essentials.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 Tim Song (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I nominate this file for deletion because:

This file has fake image description page. It's description page is duplicate of File:Screenshot1-nero9-big.png. Hence this image has no valid source information, no valid fair-use rationale and no valid other information.
- Well, at leas Koman90 tried to fix this.
This file is in violation of Wikipedia Non-Free Content Criterion 3a (Minimal Usage) as another photo (File:Screenshot1-nero9-big.png) is already in the same article (Nero (software suite)) that serves the same purpose given in fair-use rationale.
This image is in violation Wikipedia Non-Free Content Criterion 8 (Contextual Significance).

Fleet Command (talk) 20:01, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose because

The FUR was Copied and pasted form Nero 9 an similar program, i had not yet fixed the sources.
The other screenshot dose not show the "simplified" UI that is provided with essentials.
The image is of huge significance to identify the Nero essentials program suite which is more common than it's full fledged sibling.

Koman90 (talk), Network+ 23:07, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article has no critical commentary about this new image of yours. Hence it still violates both NFCC 8 and NFCC 3a. So kindly ~~keep your opposition to yourself and~~ show some respect for other people's intellectual property as well as the copyright laws and Wikipedia policies. Fleet Command (talk) 00:24, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Crossed out one expression of mine that might have negative connotations.

But still I don't think its morally correct to be so neglectful of copyright laws. When we are dealing with copyright, we are dealing with the use of intellectual properties that are created at the cost of time, energy and passion from which the creator makes an honest buck. Fleet Command (talk) 05:30, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

delete no critical commentary, no fair use.--Crossmr (talk) 16:09, 6 May 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:BeautyAndTheBeast3shot.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 ⚡ 02:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Massive pdf file (3333 x 2500; 6.4 MB), not used in any articles (and even if it was going to be, it'd need to be seriously compressed!). Was going to CSD it under F10, but as it's technically an image I thought I'd bring it here. - Mobius Clock 22:46, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete: Although this image (yes, image) does not merit speedy deletion per WP:CSD#10, not every free image needs or merits being uploaded to English Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a file sharing service. The original uploader may host this in his own blog or web site or another file sharing service, such as Wikimedia Commons. Fleet Command (talk) 12:30, 9 May 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.