Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 August 7

< August 6	August 8 >

August 7

File:Upstream on the Yangtze Gorge about 2004 before the dam.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gratuitous, unencylopaedic, unused family holiday snapshot Your Lord and Master (talk) 11:28, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Picture shows tourism through the gorge: a major industry for China. Why please discourage useful contributions?Duncanogi (talk) 13:49, 10 August 2011 (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:HDale1.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, low quality, no evidence of permission. Kelly ^hi! 15:52, 7 August 2011 (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:PhilaCnty1854.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

map is non-free - from 1966 book. (and small print on map gives various dates near then.) not pre-1877 as stated in image description. if nonfree, a free map showing equivalent information should be created - we can't use this nonfree one Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:29, 7 August 2011 (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:Majorcampseurope.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

no specific source for the image - claimed to be PD, but general website disclaimer says images are copyrighted http://www.ushmm.org/priv_acc/disclaimer/ Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:31, 7 August 2011 (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:Glk dissmisal.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

used only on talk page, no evidence that it is PD as stated Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:40, 7 August 2011 (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:Franciscan-Hotel.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 ⚡ 06:02, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

reason for being public domain is invalid (misses 1923 cutoff). none of the uses meet the NFCC - does not contribute significantly to reaaders' understanding (particularly bc other free images could be used as examples of the architectural style even if this particular building no longer exists. also, no effort to find a free photo of this building) Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:42, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP. I wrote the rationale for using the picture 5 yeas ago. Were I to redo it today, or tomorrow, it would be different. I see that the picture is being used in 3 articles, and am pretty sure that I just used it once, so other folks seem to feel that it adds something to the articles. If another picture of the building can be found, then I feel no attachment to this version. It is/was a significant example of the Pueblo Deco and Pueblo Revival styles and a major work by Trost & Trost (maybe I did use it twice?) so I feel that some version of a photo of the building should by used. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 16:37, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I found a free image with a bit of searching, so this image is now unnecessary. I'd like to point out, though, that "adding something" to an article is not enough to keep a non-free image in Wikipedia - see WP:NFCC. Readers would be able to understand Central Avenue (Albuquerque) without seeing a photo of a landmark that no longer exists on the street, List of Trost & Trost works without seeing this particular work (other works could be used as examples), and Pueblo Revival Style architecture without seeing this particular work (other works could be used as examples). In the future, when you think you have a need for a non-free image, be sure to think if there could be free images that would work (as in, photos of different buildings where the article is not about this particular building) and to check for free images at all available resources. Here, for example, I just checked the photo repository of the Library of Congress, which is the best place to check for free historical images. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:52, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We just had an edit crash, but here is what I was trying to post. :::DUMP. I changed my opinion (see above, I'd do that crossout thing if I knew how. Feel free to do it for me, anyone.) since Calliopejen1 found us a great substitute. Good move C. Carptrash (talk) 16:54, 8 August 2011 (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:Pointsdironie.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

superseded by File:Pointsdironie.png Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:06, 7 August 2011 (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:Daniel.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 20:27, 7 August 2011 (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:Dan27.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 20:29, 7 August 2011 (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:HeatUniform.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, LQ, obsoleted by File:Perth Heat uniform.png. Kelly ^hi! 20:32, 7 August 2011 (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:ABLlogo.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free logo used only for decorative purposes. Kelly ^hi! 20:33, 7 August 2011 (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.