Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 July 9

< July 8	July 10 >

July 9

File:Babette Rosmond.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: Keep. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 16:23, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See EXIF: "Licensing requests should be sent to photosales@nytimes.com." This sentence suggests that the New York Times is selling licences for this photo, so doesn't this make it a WP:NFCC#2 violation? Stefan2 (talk) 01:01, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if it is the policy of the New York Times to now claim copyright within EXIF metadata on any photograph that it uses, but image libraries and other organisations often mark all their images as copyrighted, regardless of whether they own the copyright. While this image was recently used in this article on the New York Times Well blog, it has been used previously in articles by Lerner (2001, 2002) with the caption "Courtesy of Jim Stone", who is one of Babette Rosmond's sons. So, while it is possible that the New York Times has purchased the rights for the photograph from Mr. Stone or Babette Rosmond's estate, it seems far more likely that they assumed the photo belonged to them and applied their default copyright notice to the metadata. Regardless, this 1964 photograph was used as a publicity photo and on the dust jackets of Rosmond's books and was likely created to increase the market value of her media. It is also the only image of Rosmond I was able to find. I'd happily switch to a "less copyrighted" image of Rosmond if such an image could be found/existed, but this one has low web resolution and seems otherwise compliant with WP:NFCC#2. Gobōnobo ⁺ ^c 03:07, 9 July 2012 (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:Van Halen Balance Alternate Cover.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 ⚡ 01:01, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3a since there already is another cover (File:Van Halen - Balance.jpg). Stefan2 (talk) 01:17, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This second but different NFCC cover art image is to help the reader understand how the cover image was altered as discussed and cited with supporting reference in the article. Jeffreybh (talk) 03:22, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The article does not discuss the alternate cover in any sort of depth, certainly not enough to merit another non-free image. Binksternet (talk) 00:16, 17 July 2012 (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:Steiner Infinity blue.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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No connection established between artist and uploader. There is no evidence that permission was granted for this photograph of an artwork. Binksternet (talk) 02:26, 9 July 2012 (UTC) Binksternet (talk) 02:26, 9 July 2012 (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:CTI with Forklift.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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no connection established between uploader and author of image, supposedly Matsonian Group; an advertising agency in Sacramento, California. Binksternet (talk) 02:29, 9 July 2012 (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:High CTI Score.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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no connection established between uploader and author of image, supposedly Matsonian Group; an advertising agency in Sacramento, California. Binksternet (talk) 02:29, 9 July 2012 (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:CTI Measurements.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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no connection established between uploader and author of image, supposedly Matsonian Group; an advertising agency in Sacramento, California. Binksternet (talk) 02:29, 9 July 2012 (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:Procedure for CTI.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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no connection established between uploader and author of image, supposedly Matsonian Group; an advertising agency in Sacramento, California. Binksternet (talk) 02:29, 9 July 2012 (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:CTI Using Custom Lifts.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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no connection established between uploader and author of image, supposedly Matsonian Group; an advertising agency in Sacramento, California. Binksternet (talk) 02:29, 9 July 2012 (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:CTI Using Forklifts.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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no connection established between uploader and author of image, supposedly Matsonian Group; an advertising agency in Sacramento, California. Binksternet (talk) 02:29, 9 July 2012 (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:Graham at NRB 1977.jpg

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2012 July 9.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons. Please nominate it for deletion there if you still feel it should be deleted. AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:02, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are not supposed to use Wikipedia file information pages for fair use rationales of images on Commons. If the image on Commons is non-free, it should instead be deleted. Stefan2 (talk) 08:21, 9 July 2012 (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:Perry Signature.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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Useless, see File:Perry Signature.jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 08:50, 9 July 2012 (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:Scott Perry Signature.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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Useless, see File:Perry Signature.jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 08:50, 9 July 2012 (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:JOSEP FONT I HUGUET.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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons. Please nominate it for deletion there if you still feel it should be deleted. AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:05, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

obsolote Santiagofont (talk) 15:29, 9 July 2012 (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:"Sidekick for hire" graffiti.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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree and up for deletion on Commons: commons:Commons:Deletion_requests/File:"Sidekick_for_hire"_graffiti.jpg. No point in keeping it around here though because it's not in use (ineligible for fair use). Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:23, 9 July 2012 (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.