Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2013 November 10

< November 9	November 11 >

November 10

File:Garfield headerimage.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 Mark Arsten (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8. As the article The Garfield Show currently already has the logo of the show, no need for two. Also, apparently this image has been removed before, and has been restored by Nyttend for a unparticular reason that being. Blurred Lines 02:32, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The image was removed from its article without solid explanation; nothing was given that's comparable to the sensible explanation that Blurred Lines has given here, so I restored the image to its article. I don't particularly care what happens to it, as long as we keep it or as long as we delete it for an understandable reason. I restored the image as part of checking Blurred Lines' deleted edits to images, which cannot be trusted due to repeated incidents of bad image tagging, e.g. this for an image from a page with an explicit GPL release, or the incidents that led me to block Blurred Lines a month ago. Nyttend (talk) 02:46, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The image has been removed because it has been replaced by a newer image, and it hasn't been used in an article in a week. Restoring it and re-putting it in the article doesn't make any sense. Now there are two logos on the article that are identical, which fails WP:NFCC#8, because it's just decoration, not important to readers. Also, discussing myself, blocks, and other unnecessary stuff that doesn't involve the image is not going to help or do anything to this request. Blurred Lines 04:22, 10 November 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:Fosters intertitle.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 Mark Arsten (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8. As the article Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends currently already has the logo of the show, no need for two. Also, apparently this image has been removed before, and has been restored by Nyttend for a unparticular reason that being. Blurred Lines 02:34, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The image was removed from its article without solid explanation; nothing was given that's comparable to the sensible explanation that Blurred Lines has given here, so I restored the image to its article. I don't particularly care what happens to it, as long as we keep it or as long as we delete it for an understandable reason. I restored the image as part of checking Blurred Lines' deleted edits to images, which cannot be trusted due to repeated incidents of bad image tagging, e.g. this for an image from a page with an explicit GPL release, or the incidents that led me to block Blurred Lines a month ago. Nyttend (talk) 02:46, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The image has been removed because it has been replaced by a newer image, and it hasn't been used in an article in a week. Restoring it and re-putting it in the article doesn't make any sense. Now there are two logos on the article that are identical, which fails WP:NFCC#8, because it's just decoration, not important to readers. Also, discussing myself, blocks, and other unnecessary stuff that doesn't involve the image is not going to help or do anything to this request. Blurred Lines 04:22, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep File:Fosters intertitle.jpg and remove File:FHFIFLogo.png. Blurred Lines didn't confirm where the picture was from, but at least I confirmed it's from a television screenshot. (For the record, it's from a recording I obtained.) JSH-alive/^{talk/cont/mail} 14:52, 14 November 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:ROY STONE POSTER 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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 23:04, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, appears to be self promotional, and has prominent watermark, WP:NOT your webhost etc.. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:02, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Addtional -

File:ROYSTONEPOSTER2.jpg
File:METALROYSTONE.jpg
File:GIGSEVENTSBOOKINGSROYSTONE.jpg
File:MP3DOWNLOADS.jpg
File:CDALBUMSLOGO.jpg
File:ROYSTONESPOTIFY.jpg
File:LIVEMETALROYSTONE.jpg
File:ROYSTONELOGO2.jpg
File:ROYSTONELOGO3.jpg
File:ROYSTONELOGO4.jpg
File:LIVEMETALFLYER.jpg
File:LIVEMETAL2.jpg
File:ROYSTONEBANNER1.jpg
File:ROYSTONEBANNER2.jpg
File:ROYSTONEBANNER3.jpg
File:ROYSTONEBANNER4.jpg
File:ROYSTONEBANNER5.jpg
File:ROYSTONEBANNER6.jpg
File:ROYSTONET-SHIRT1.jpg
File:ROYSTONELIVE18.jpg
File:ROYSTONEIBANEZ.jpg
File:ROYSTONEBEAST1.jpg
File:ROYSTONEBEAST2.jpg
File:ROYSTONESTUDIO1.jpg
File:ROYSTONESTUDIO2.jpg
File:ROYSTONESTUDIO3.jpg
Please note that there are far more than this - see user's contribs. If someone can add them , please do. I haven't got time at the moment. Peridon (talk) 20:41, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:27, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all Promotional intent, and there's now way that all are needed even if he merits an article. (Even if you weeded out the spam, there's nothing I can see there that passes WP:BAND. In fact, there'd be very little left anyway...) Peridon (talk) 19:48, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per Peridon. Blurred Lines 20:02, 10 November 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:Sadako Sasaki statue.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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 23:04, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

orphan, relatively recent sculpture, no freedom of panorama in japan commons:Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Japan Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:32, 10 November 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:Martin Engineering 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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 23:04, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Un-used logo, for a company without an article. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martin Engineering. Super Mario Man 18:04, 10 November 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:Pablo Picasso, 1905 - Garcon a La Pipe.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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 23:04, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

orphan, can't be moved to commons, lower-res version of File:Garçon à la pipe.jpg, worse-quality version - coloring is significantly off of almost all google image results Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:26, 10 November 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:HAFEZ.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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 23:04, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

orphaned, apparently nonfree - no stated source, but appears to be an example of a recent artwork by a calligraper (much more than just letters though so definitely copyrightable)Tabari&diff=178062651 Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:27, 10 November 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:John Hurt as The Doctor.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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 23:04, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Granted, with the 50th anniv special around the corner and understanding how Hurt's version of the Doctors fits into things (eg, whether the current Doctor montage needs to be expanded with a canonical image of the character) is yet known, we don't need to use non-free imagery to show that John Hurt was introduced as The Doctor in "Name of the Doctor"; a free image of Hurt (such as the one from the 2013 Cannes festival) is sufficient to show this fact, thus this image fails NFCC#1 (free replacement). MASEM (t) 22:10, 10 November 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:Planet Discovery Neighbourhood in Milky Way Galaxy.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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons. Please nominate it for deletion there if you still feel it should be deleted. AnomieBOT ⚡ 00:01, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Out of date infodiagram. More than half known exoplanets are further away than this image says. See http://exoplanet.eu/catalog/all_fields/ 300lightyears(ly)=92parsecs(pc) Astredita (talk) 23:16, 10 November 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.