Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2013 May 29

< May 28	May 30 >

May 29

File:Mhamdwl15.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, unidentified subject. Kelly ^hi! 03:31, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

delete never used, no apparent purpose, doesn't seem useful. Mangoe (talk) 18:47, 29 May 2013 (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:Wilson Center logo.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Low quality JPEG of a text-based logo, a better version available at File:Woodrow Wilson Center logo.jpg Mosmof (talk) 05:21, 29 May 2013 (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:Eega poster.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: The double image is being deleted, because it constitutes a gallery. Dianna (talk) 02:06, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The revisions by Dravidianhero (talk · contribs) violate Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2013 April 20#File:Eega and Naan Ee merged film poster.jpg and need to be deleted per WP:CSD#G4. The revision by Raghusri (talk · contribs) can probably be kept. Stefan2 (talk) 14:45, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep The previous deletion wasn't justified. It should be noted that the article describes two original films, Eega and Naan Ee. The infobox picture should therefore represent both films as one film poster doesn't represent both films. The merging of two separate articles became necessary only after it was observed that the content was very similar, else there would have been separate articles with separate pictures. Experts on the subject support a merged poster at the talkpage: Talk:Eega#Two_films.2C_two_different_posters. Previously merging the articles was decided here: Talk:Naan Ee.-- Dravidian Hero 15:09, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Um, no. A list article doesn't get an image of all items in the list. See WP:NFLISTS. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:11, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A montage is preferred according to WP:NFLISTS, which the current one is. Why do you compare a list article with a film article? They are totally different.-- Dravidian Hero 15:21, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:NFG. A montage is exactly the same thing as a gallery, so WP:NFG also applies in the same way to montages. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:24, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is a clear exemption canditate. Both pictures represent the article, while one alone would mislead readers that there is only one original film in Telugu language (Eega). It should be very clear by seeing the infobox image alone that there is a second film.Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Infoboxes#Purpose_of_an_infobox-- Dravidian Hero 15:38, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The rule is that you should take the old discussion to WP:DRV if you disagree with it instead of reposting a file unilaterally. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:12, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see, but the old image looked stretched. I uploaded a new montage.-- Dravidian Hero 17:46, 29 May 2013 (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:AjmanMen-Arabia.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but the date given directly contradicts the template; the date says 1932, and the template says it's works made before 1923 that are public domain. If I'm not understanding, feel free to speedily close this. Qwyrxian (talk) 15:05, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The template says that it was published before 1923, not that it was made before 1923. Different reasons for being in the public domain are given in the permission field: it says that it was either published without a copyright notice before 1978 (see {{PD-US-no notice}}) or without a copyright renewal before 1964 (see {{PD-US-not renewed}}). Since the uploader doesn't specify which PD reason it is, it seems that the uploader doesn't know whether there was a copyright notice or a copyright renewal, so the uploader seems to have insufficient evidence to prove the PD status. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:10, 29 May 2013 (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:JMTleft.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

According to the image description, this photo comes from Hunter Darrouzet Photography, which claims "All content copyright © Hunter Darrouzet". There is no indication on the site that anything is released under a free license. – Quadell ^(talk) 21:03, 29 May 2013 (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.