Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 November 15

< November 14	November 16 >

November 15

File:Elysee Palace Sheraton 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 ⚡ 10:06, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Public statue that still exists. A free equivalent could be created. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 00:01, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - copyvio, no FOP in France. Chesdovi (talk) 18:26, 15 November 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:There is no obstacle.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 ⚡ 10:06, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Public statue which still exists. A free equivalent could be created. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 00:02, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - copyvio, no FOP in France. Chesdovi (talk) 18:53, 15 November 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:Bloomberg Businessweek- Steve Jobs Commemorative Issue.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 ⚡ 10:06, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unfree magazine covers depicting someone can't be used in an article about the person unless to "directly illustrate a point about the publication of the image". Armbrust ^{Talk to me about my edits}_review 00:38, 15 November 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:Fortune- Exclusive Excerpt.jpeg

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 ⚡ 10:06, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unfree magazine covers depicting someone can't be used in an article about the person unless to "directly illustrate a point about the publication of the image". Armbrust ^{Talk to me about my edits}_review 00:38, 15 November 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:MLI Route Map.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:06, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

orphaned outdated airport route map, don't see any reason to maintain Skier Dude (talk) 05:50, 15 November 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:GYY Route Map.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:06, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

orphaned, outdated airport map route, see no need to retain Skier Dude (talk) 05:57, 15 November 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:PlmLogo-FabianSantos.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 ⚡ 10:06, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

orphaned user-created logo - no encyc use Skier Dude (talk) 05:59, 15 November 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:Beauty And The Beast Logo.jpeg

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 ⚡ 10:06, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

orphaned hs musical promo pic; no encyc use Skier Dude (talk) 06:09, 15 November 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:Danmoney.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 ⚡ 10:06, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

orphaned user's image; no encyc use Skier Dude (talk) 06:12, 15 November 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:Tyler Rankin as the Beast.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 ⚡ 10:06, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OR, LQ image from a high school musical Skier Dude (talk) 06:14, 15 November 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:Uh Oh!2007.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 ⚡ 10:06, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OR, no real encyc use Skier Dude (talk) 06:15, 15 November 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:Zoe8.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 ⚡ 10:06, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fraudulent CC license, screencap. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:50, 15 November 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:X The Best- Make the Music Go Bang.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 ⚡ 10:06, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Invalid FUR —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:55, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why the FUR is invalid. I went and fixed the template on the page where the image is featured. Could someone please fix the FUR for me? --evrik ^(talk) 15:12, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Response Every piece of media has some kind of license or is in the public domain. In the case of album artwork, it is almost always copyrighted. Since Wikipedia is a free content project, we need to have a fair-use rationale for displaying copyrighted material. When it comes to album covers, we can justify using that artwork for identifying the album in the article, but we can't justify reproducing all of the other artwork in the liner notes. If you want to critically discuss the album's artwork using reliable third-party sources, then you can reproduce some other artwork from the liner notes. E.g. I have uploaded both covers to Everything That Happens Will Happen Today as well as one piece of interior artwork that is critically discussed with citations. This instance of the X album is just finding a cool picture from the liner notes and sticking it in the article. We just can't do that. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:05, 15 November 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:460trw.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) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:06, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Obsoleted by File:460trw.jpg Magog the Ogre (talk) 11:44, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I uploaded a color png version to commons File:460th Tactical Reconnaissance Wing - Emblem.png Bwmoll3 (talk) 11:48, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Magog, do you mean File:460trw.jpg is OB by the colour version? Chesdovi (talk) 14:20, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right; I move through lots of images per day, and a typo (or six) is going to happen along the way.

Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:58, 15 November 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:RavDavid.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 as F8 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:06, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic. Does not say who this is. Chesdovi (talk) 14:07, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to be Avishai David. --evrik ^(talk) 15:22, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep now in use. Calliopejen1 (talk) 01:34, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is still obsolete by File:RavDavid22.jpg. Chesdovi (talk) 10:25, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Commons and then delete. There's no reason not to have multiple free images of the same person, but there's also no reason to have them here rather than at Commons. Angr (talk) 10:55, 18 November 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:Al aqsa old jerusalem.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 ⚡ 10:06, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It would seem from this users talk page that all images he uploaded were not in fact his own. It is unlikely this user took an aerial view as good as this. Chesdovi (talk) 14:11, 15 November 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:Walls of jerusalem2.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 ⚡ 10:06, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As above. Also there is a date stamp. Chesdovi (talk) 14:14, 15 November 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:Cole, Liberia 1.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 ⚡ 10:06, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This nomination also includes:

These images do not comply with Wikipedia's policy on Non-free content, specifically WP:NFCC#2, "Respect for commercial opportunities". In particular, at WP:NFC#Unacceptable use, see the following items: "5. An image whose subject happens to be a war, to illustrate an article on the war. Use may be appropriate if the image itself is a proper subject for commentary in the article: for example, an iconic image that has received attention in its own right, if the image is discussed in the article" and "7. A photo from a press or photo agency (e.g., AP, Corbis or Getty Images), unless the photo itself is the subject of sourced commentary in the article." There is no indication in any of the articles where these photos are used that any of them is "an iconic image that has received attention in its own right" or "is the subject of sourced commentary in the article". The images are being used solely to illustrate the wars, and occur mostly in galleries or infoboxes, devoid of any sourced commentary. Angr (talk) 19:15, 15 November 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:Mobilsouthwest.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 ⚡ 10:06, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Picture fails the non-free content criteria, as it is only used for illustration and doesn't enhance the understanding of the topic and article doesn't contain critical commentary about it. Armbrust ^{Talk to me about my edits}_review 19:45, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Silly nom, this is a nonstarter. Book cover art is widely accepted as satisfying NFCC, so much so that there's a template for it with tens of thousands of uses. Illustrating the look and feel of a travel guide series by showing the distinctive cover art is front and center in the reason we allow cover art, as this look and feel is what the guide is marketing. - Wikidemon (talk) 04:18, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. The article does not discuss this particular book (2006 for the American Southwest) as required by the book-cover tag. Angr (talk) 08:55, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The tag is not policy, nor is that what the tag says. The copyright tag, not the book cover use rationale template, says that book cover images are used "to illustrate an article discussing the book in question". That phrase is to make sure use relates to the article subject, not to distinguish between one book and another book in a series. The wording is in there to preclude the occasional misguided use of a book cover to illustrate the subject of a book, for example an article about the Summer of Love being illustrated by a book about Jefferson Airplane. There, the book's cover details are not directly relevant to talking about the cultural movement. It's a strained interpretation to take this to mean that a book series with a distinctive look cannot be illustrated by choosing one of the series books. That would do nothing to further the principles behind NFCC, and it would ensure that we cannot illustrate what a book series looks like, as every single book in the series has the same status. - Wikidemon (talk) 18:17, 19 November 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:Skline of Kitchener.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 ⚡ 10:06, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A free use photo of the city is certainly possible. This is a collage of various city views which have no rationales for each small photo that's part of it. We hope (talk) 23:29, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, NFCC violation. Angr (talk) 08:56, 16 November 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.