Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 January 29

< January 28	January 30 >

January 29

File:Sabskuantan6.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 ⚡ 06:05, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, unidentified subject. Kelly ^hi! 03:27, 29 January 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:RoyalOzFlag.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 ⚡ 06:05, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, obsoleted by File:Royal Oz flag.svg Kelly ^hi! 03:35, 29 January 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:Glycine.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) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:05, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, obsoleted by File:Glycin - Glycine.svg Kelly ^hi! 03:50, 29 January 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:Bureauagradinsidejpeg20040111.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 ⚡ 06:05, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, obsoleted by File:Bureau a gradin Sideview.PNG Kelly ^hi! 04:24, 29 January 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:Gouns2.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 ⚡ 06:05, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, unencyclopedic. Kelly ^hi! 04:32, 29 January 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:Chromium 6.0.453.0.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 ⚡ 06:05, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned screenshot. Kelly ^hi! 04:53, 29 January 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:Unstable Roaming Through Chaos band flyer.gif.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 ⚡ 18:11, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This image is tagged with {{FAL}}, which claims it is licensed under the Free Art License. The file description page also says, "Website allows use of all images which are by Unstable." I am not sure what the source of this image is; the file description page has three links, but I can't find this particular image on any of those three pages. In any case, none of these three pages has any mention of the Free Art License or says anything to suggest that the images on the page are free to use. —Bkell (talk) 06:24, 29 January 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:Unstable Versatile.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 ⚡ 18:11, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This image is tagged with {{GFDL-self}}, which claims that the uploader is the creator of the image and that the image has been licensed under the GFDL. However, a link to a Myspace page is given as the source, and that page does not mention the GFDL. The file description page here says, "Unstable allows free usage of any images portaining to their name," but the linked Myspace page doesn't have any statement to confirm that, either. Therefore we have no evidence that the copyright holder (who is apparently the band Unstable) has really agreed to license this image under the GFDL, as claimed. —Bkell (talk) 06:31, 29 January 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:Unstable Roaming Through Chaos band.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 ⚡ 18:11, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This image is tagged with {{GFDL-self}}, which claims that the uploader is the creator of the image and that the image has been licensed under the GFDL. However, the file description page also says that the copyright holder is the band Unstable, and this same image appears on the band's Myspace page [1]. The file description page here says, "Unstable allows free usage of all images portaining to their name." But the band's Myspace page does not mention the GFDL, nor does it have any statement to confirm that the images there are free to use. Therefore we have no evidence that the copyright holder (who is apparently the band Unstable) has really agreed to license this image under the GFDL, as claimed. —Bkell (talk) 06:40, 29 January 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:Unstable band Versatile long beach.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 ⚡ 18:11, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This image has no copyright tag describing its licensing status. I don't know what the source of this image is—the file description page says the image comes from the band's official Web site, and there are three links on the file description page, but I can't find this image on any of those three pages. The file description page here says that the copyright holder is the band Unstable, and also says, "Website allows use of all images which are by Unstable," but none of the three linked pages describe the copyright or licensing status of their images, nor do they have a statement to confirm that the images they contain are free to use. Therefore we have no evidence that the copyright holder has really agreed to license this image freely, or even what that supposed free license is. —Bkell (talk) 06:50, 29 January 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:Unstable band long beach.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 ⚡ 18:11, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This image has no copyright tag describing its licensing status. The source of the image is unclear; a link is provided on the file description page to [2], which is a lower-resolution copy of this image as used on the band's Encyclopaedia Metallum page. There is also a link to UntableLINY.com, which appears not to exist. The file description page here says that the copyright holder is the band Unstable, and also says, "Website allows use of all images which are by Unstable," but the Encyclopaedia Metallum page does not describe the copyright or licensing status of this image, nor does it have a statement to confirm that this image is free to use. Therefore we have no evidence that the copyright holder has really agreed to license this image freely, or even what that supposed free license is. —Bkell (talk) 06:58, 29 January 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:Malays5.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 ⚡ 18:11, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Author and publication of depicted 3D artwork unidentified. Kelly ^hi! 06:25, 29 January 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:Puyo-combos.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. The PNG file only ever had one version, and that one version has been noted on the SVG file's description page on Commons, which completes the trail of attribution, satisfying any keep concerns. SchuminWeb (Talk) 17:01, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned game diagram. Kelly ^hi! 06:26, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As I understand it, we usually don't delete PNGs that were traced to make SVGs. As {{Vector version available}} states, deleting the PNG breaks the chain of attribution. The article currently uses the image File:Puyo-guide-2.svg which is an SVG trace of the CC-BY/GFDL dual-licensed File:Puyo-combos.png. --uploader Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 14:42, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We can just attribute the author on the SVG image page if necessary when deleting. Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:15, 31 January 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:Genliseapygmaea2web.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. The image is orphaned, kind of low quality, and watermarked, which would otherwise make it suitable for deletion. I considered moving it to Commons, and that's where consideration of the OTRS ticket came into play. Without an OTRS account, and considering that the only thing added since the deletion nomination was an OTRS ticket number and a link to the archived site, one must assume that the OTRS ticket contains only the information that was added back in 2004. The problem I found is that the permission given seems a little less than convincing that the owner of the photo intended to release the image under the license provided. The message was "Feel free to use any of the pictures from my Homepage!" but nothing about licensing and such. Additionally, the CC license was added much later than everything else, which confirms my questioning of the license's validity. Thus we must delete this picture, I'm afraid. SchuminWeb (Talk) 16:56, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unable to verify source or permission. Kelly ^hi! 06:27, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've sent a request for a ticket to OTRS JoJan (talk) 08:18, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Permission received and OTRS template added. Also added an external link to webarchive. Taketa (talk) 19:49, 4 February 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:PolPotdead.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 ⚡ 18:11, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is an image of the corpse of Pol Pot, clearly taken from Reuters. We already have a photo of Pol Pot in the article (File:Pol Pot in 1977.jpg, although it appears this image may soon be deleted from the Commons). This photo itself is not the subject of sourced commentary in the Pol Pot article. See the seventh example of unacceptable use of non-free images: "A photo from a press agency (e.g., AP), unless the photo itself is the subject of sourced commentary in the article." —Bkell (talk) 07:39, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This image has been nominated for deletion once before; see Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2008 February 12#Image:PolPotdead.gif. —Bkell (talk) 07:43, 29 January 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:AppliqueWaistcoat.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 ⚡ 18:11, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No source given on file description page. Likely copyright violation from [3], where the same photograph of this vest was posted nine months before it was uploaded here. —Bkell (talk) 07:54, 29 January 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:Frwak.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 ⚡ 18:11, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Invalid, almost non-existent fair use rationale. No evidence that this particular image is necessary for understanding of article, and no critical commentary in article. (The caption of "Cartman laughs at Butters" could very well describe a scene in just about every episode, really.) Kinu ^t/_c 08:08, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NFCC#8. VernoWhitney (talk) 16:47, 1 February 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:Route 149 pic.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 ⚡ 18:11, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File description page used as an article about a non-notable band. —Bkell (talk) 08:50, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, could possibly be deleted via WP:CSD#G11 as obvious COI bandspam masquerading as file description. --Kinu ^t/_c 10:53, 30 January 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:Complex hearts score.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 ⚡ 18:11, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Personal score sheet for a card game, unencyclopedic. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 13:01, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no encyclopedic use, Wikipedia is not Flickr. --Kinu ^t/_c 10:54, 30 January 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:Cheng Jianping.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. Off2riorob is correct that this is a replaceable fair use image. A one-year jail term is something we can wait out for a free image after the subject is released. If the person were in the pokey for life or no longer with us, it would perhaps be a different story, but this is not an irreplaceable photo by any means, and thus by WP:NFCC#1, we must delete. SchuminWeb (Talk) 17:07, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

non free file with an invalid fair use rationale in the infobox of a living person when a free commons compatible one could be found. She is in jail for a year is not an excuse to use a copyrighted picture. Off2riorob (talk) 14:50, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Potential keep rationale

note, I don't regularly do deletion discussions, so most/all of these may be off-point:

The photo does indeed illustrate the subject in question
The photo has no free, available equivalent or one that could be created that would adequately give the same information (at this time)
She's a notable political prisoner. Adding a face to an unfamiliar Chinese name is a dramatic improvement to an article about human rights, which at the fine grain are always rights for a specific individual.
This photo was posted to her Twitter account, appears to be self-shot, from a web-cam or other low-quality camera.
Given the low quality of the photo it's unlikely it could be used elsewhere for commercial reasons.
Given the non-profit advocacy field, it's unlikely copyright would be deprived for personal commercial reasons
Since the photo was posted to Twitter it's unlikely there was any expectation of privacy
The photo was replicated all over media coverage of her case, with no apparent link to copyright claims except that it came from a public Twitter profile
Both Cheng and her husband have been actively trying to publicize her plight and it seems there would be little objection to using a self-taken photo to add a face for their campaign to raise awareness about human rights and Cheng's imprisonment
There are no other appropriate alternatives
She is currently in Jail. Permission to use the photo would have to come from her fiance who is in China, and not easy to contact Ocaasi (talk) 15:18, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If Chang and her husband are as you claim "actively trying to publicize" her one year in jail then they should release a commons compatable picture. Pic is from here on an unconfirmed twitter account - we assume copyright so claims that the owner would not object to usage is crystal balling - we do not need pictures in our articles - wikipedia is a commons licensed repository and fair use is only to be used in situations where there are no chance of a free picture - this is not the case here - this claim is just - oh we have no pic - lets use this one from twitter. Off2riorob (talk) 16:18, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just one point there: the Twitter account is confirmed; it's the one from which she sent the tweet that got her imprisoned in the first place, and multiple RS identified the account by name. Ocaasi (talk) 16:29, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Its irrelevant anyways, although it might be confirmed by understanding the posts and such it is not officially confirmed twitter account as it does not have the official identified flag. Although some users would like to add pictures from here and there that are copyrighted and add weak false fair use rationales to them it is against policy. Off2riorob (talk) 17:09, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep She certainly isn't available for a free image at this time and I tend to agree with the rest of Ocaasi's comments. Hobit (talk) 03:22, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

note to the admin closing this request - The fact that she is in jail for twelve months isn't an appropriate fair use rationale at all, there is no excuse under fair use to use this picture. And I hope the administrator that closes this recognizes that - not having a commons license pic and a living person being in jail for a year is not a fair use rational to allow wikipedia to use a assumed copyrighted twitter pic. Off2riorob (talk) 14:31, 4 February 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:Freestudio.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 ⚡ 18:11, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An orphaned image uploaded by a spammer who used it for her Free Studio article promoting her product which is now deleted.—J. M. (talk) 15:43, 29 January 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:MapMorocco.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 ⚡ 18:11, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned PNG map. Kelly ^hi! 16:04, 29 January 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:Caguan DMZ Colombia.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 ⚡ 18:11, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned map. Uploader also states it is for use "on Wikipedia only", which is not a free license. Kelly ^hi! 16:08, 29 January 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:Acciaccatura execution 2.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 ⚡ 18:11, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

obsoleted by File:Acciaccatura execution.png Magog the Ogre (talk) 17:05, 29 January 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:Salmon-river-2.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 ⚡ 18:11, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader specified non-commercial use. Kelly ^hi! 17:50, 29 January 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:Sertindole.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 ⚡ 18:11, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, low resolution; replaced by File:Sertindol.svg. Leyo 18:13, 29 January 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.