Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 May 29

: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: deleted. See :commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Judgment Bus New Orleans 2011.jpg for information and commentary about a court case that rules that a photograph of a beverage bottle did not violate the copyright of the label. Therefore, this photo is replaceable with a free version and we don't use a non-free one. --B (talk) 01:27, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Boddingtons601.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Boddingtons601.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3ABoddingtons601.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Boddingtons601.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ABoddingtons601.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Farrtj ([{{fullurl:User talk:Farrtj|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Delete: Professional copyright image (likely advertising) is claimed in the rationale to use to just show the product but there is no commentary about the image other than the caption. The source link is a base URL and useless. Used as decoration. ww2censor (talk) 04:26, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Keep, the caption explains that the image is there to show the colour and appearance of the beer. Boddinton's is an important beer in UK beer culture for being a very early example of a blonde beer. SilkTork *^{Tea time} 10:50, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

:What is so unique about the colour of this beer from any of thousands of other blond beers that make it necessary to use a non-free image? Any freely licenced photo of a glass of Boddingtons would do the job just as well. Besides which there are other problems with this image; there is still no proper source, which is sufficient grounds for deletion on its own, and an improper licence is attached that is for a logo but this image is obviously not a logo. ww2censor (talk) 15:19, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

::It pre-dates other blonde ales. Blonde ales didn't emerge in the UK until after Timothy Taylor's Landlord and Boddington's Bitter. Boddington's was bought up by Whitbread and the beer got notional and international distribution. The first blonde ale to get such distribution in the UK. You are right that someone could take a picture of the beer, so it could be replaced. But at the same time there is no rush to have this picture deleted as it is not violating anyone's rights. It's a promotional image, intended for wide release. Wikipedia's lawyer has gone on record saying that we should leave such images on Wikipedia until someone complains about them. That came up in a discussion on Commons regarding beer label images. We should be concentrating on the images that really are violating someone's rights, not wasting our time on images that no one is going to complain about. SilkTork *^{Tea time} 10:28, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

:::Update, he was talking about photographs of wine bottle labels:

{{quote|I don't believe there's a copyright problem with photographs of wine-bottle labels. In the absence of a complaint from wine makers, I would not worry about the issue. In the event that there's a copyright complaint from any wine makers, they'll send WMF a formal takedown notice, and we'll respond appropriately. —Mike}}

:::The issue is the same though, if an image is intended for public consumption and to identify a commercial product, the chances of a takedown notice are unlikely. If Mike Goodwin is happy with the situation, then let's get on with dealing with more important issues. SilkTork *^{Tea time} 10:35, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

::::Take-down notices or not, and I don't believe there is s copyright problem are irrelevant and spurious arguments because all non-free images must comply with our non-free policy. This image is copyright and both fails WP:NFCC#8 and WP:NFCC#3a. BTW, Mike Godwin is no longer [http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Staff#Legal General Council of the foundation]. If you don't like the policy then try to change it. ww2censor (talk) 16:38, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I like that people work on dedicated areas that interest them. But I do think you could be exercising some common sense judgement when going through and tagging images for deletion, so that images that don't have a snowball in hell's chance of being objected to are not the ones you select for deletion. You could come across a bit jobsworth using the "all non-free images must comply with our non-free policy." rationale. Yes, and WP:IMPERFECT is also a policy. It would be helpful to make a sensible judgement between the two. In the normal course of editing, the image would be replaced by an appropriate one. If the article came up for scrutiny in a peer review, GAN or FAC, the image would be replaced by the active nominator/main contributors. This happens all the time. I'm objecting to this on principle because a) the image is actually useful and b) marking it for deletion is not helpful. When an attempt was made on Commons to delete various beer and wine images, that was not supported because the chances of anyone objecting to the use of the images on Wikipedia were very remote. Don't just look at the wording, think about the rationale. The purpose of the non-free policy is to protect Wikipedia from legal challenges, it is not to remove images that will never face a legal challenge. SilkTork *^{Tea time} 16:43, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

:Perhaps you should complain about all the other non-free deletion nominations because you are objection to the policy, not just one particular nomination. If you don't like the policy then try to change it, don't use that objection to complain about a valid deletion nomination. What not complain also about all the other editors whose work you view as jobsworth? As an admin I am surprised that you are being selective in only quoting the reason for NFCC policy is to to protect Wikipedia from legal challenges but you forget to quote that the complete rationale is:

::* To support Wikipedia's mission to produce perpetually free content for unlimited distribution, modification and application by all users in all media.

::* To minimize legal exposure by limiting the amount of non-free content, using more narrowly defined criteria than apply under United States fair use law.

::* To facilitate the judicious use of non-free content to support the development of a high-quality encyclopedia.

:Again the lack of any possible threat of legal action is not a sufficient reason to keep non-free images. Also as an admin I would have thought you would know the best place to complain about policy is on policy talk page and not here, so suggest you take it to Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. ww2censor (talk)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Skier Dude}} AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:PIC00004.JPG ([{{fullurl:File:PIC00004.JPG|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3APIC00004.JPG%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:PIC00004.JPG|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3APIC00004.JPG}} logs]) – uploaded by Mitternacht90 ([{{fullurl:User talk:Mitternacht90|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Orphaned low quality image of a fish. Uploader identifies it as possibly being a Mexican Tetra, however it looks different from the Mexican Tetras in the article in the belly and tail regions. Whatever it is, the quality makes it unlikely that the image will ever be used, as does the fact that the fish is distorted in the image by the plastic bag.

Second listing (first never transcluded to FfD page due to TW error) Sven Manguard Wha? 06:13, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

• Delete even the uploader isn't sure what this is. That leaves little hope for the rest of us --Guerillero | My Talk 02:09, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|B}} AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:188X5247.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:188X5247.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3A188X5247.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:188X5247.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3A188X5247.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Luckymarino ([{{fullurl:User talk:Luckymarino|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

OR, UE Skier Dude (talk) 06:24, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

• Can you please offer a real reason to delete this image that isn't two letter codes --Guerillero | My Talk 01:30, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

:OR=orphaned UE=unencylopaedic Skier Dude (talk) 05:21, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Fastily}} AnomieBOT⚡ 10:05, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Hugoweb.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Hugoweb.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3AHugoweb.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Hugoweb.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3AHugoweb.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Luckymarino ([{{fullurl:User talk:Luckymarino|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

OR, subject not ID'd Skier Dude (talk) 06:25, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

• Its a stunning free image of a boxer. I fail to see a reason to delete this. As I said above, can you please use a clear rational for deletion --Guerillero | My Talk 02:14, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
• Should probably be moved to Commons - this is too good to lose. --B (talk) 01:30, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Fastily}} AnomieBOT⚡ 10:05, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

:<;span class="plainlinks nourlexpansion lx">:File:AA logo black on white.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:AA logo black on white.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3AAA+logo+black+on+white.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:AA logo black on white.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3AAA+logo+black+on+white.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Paulsagoo ([{{fullurl:User talk:Paulsagoo|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

OR, UE - both revisions Skier Dude (talk) 06:27, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

• Delete What the? Sven Manguard Wha? 08:58, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
• Delete I have a suspicion that this is copyrighted --Guerillero | My Talk 02:16, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
• Delete Keep I think this image is completely ineligible for copyright...but more importantly is completely useless. However, I appreciate the sarcasm Guerillero! :-) — BQZip01 — ^talk 20:16, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
• :Geez, don't nominate something for deletion when you know a FUR could easily be crafted. — BQZip01 — ^talk 22:02, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
• ::And now it's fixed. Geez. — BQZip01 — ^talk 22:13, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
• It's eligible for copyright and copyrighted. It's the logo for the Asian Excellence Awards. There's some problem with the jpeg file preventing in to be properly rendered when downsized. It's possible to see the whole image by following the appropriate link on the image description page: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/35/AA_logo_black_on_white.jpg --damiens.rf 23:55, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
• :WTH? [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3AAA_logo_black_on_white.jpg&action=historysubmit&diff=432598488&oldid=431446018 You just changed the image in the middle of a discussion]. — BQZip01 — ^talk 15:46, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
• ::I reverted it back. The swirly things at the top of the As in the logo are too artistic to be ineligibly for copyright. --Guerillero | My Talk 15:58, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
• :::I concur, but a simple FUR for the org should be quite easy. — BQZip01 — ^talk 22:02, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
• ::You complain about not "fixing" the image and then again when I try to fix it. Get a life. Your personal comments on FfDs are puerile.--damiens.rf 17:04, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
• :::I complained strictly about certain actions and postings. Nothing was personal. I certainly never told you to "get a life"...pretty sure that violates some policy somewhere...What I complained about was the fact that a black box was nominated for deletion (at least as far as I could tell). And then changed the image that was up for deletion. Seems to me that's misleading not to note your actions. I agreed that the black box should be deleted as it served no purpose, but this logo clearly does serve a purpose(even if it's buggy, we can work on that). I believe that you shouldn't nominate something strictly on procedural grounds when it can clearly be fixed (took me just a few minutes). — BQZip01 — ^talk 20:21, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
• ::::I never nominated this image for deletion, fella. Stop obsessing about me. --damiens.rf 00:03, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
• ::::And consider using striking (exemple) when [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2011_May_29&curid=31918189&diff=432908560&oldid=432907593 redacting your talk page comments]. It's far worse that fixing an image during a deletion discussion. --damiens.rf 00:09, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
• :::::I tempered my comments (by a single letter) and quickly made corrections about what I said before anyone else had a chance to reply. By changing the image, you changed what people are talking about. By changing one letter, I attempted to defuse a situation by not making it worse. By correcting what I stated before anyone else had a chance to respond, I fixed a few errors. — BQZip01 — ^talk 01:30, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

• COMMENT Note that the image was changed halfway through the discussion. — BQZip01 — ^talk 01:30, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
• As of right now, the image does not display properly for me on any browser or device I own. If someone can/wants to fix it, we can keep it, but we delete malformed images as a matter of course. --B (talk) 01:34, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
• :once you click on the file page click the image. there is something wrong with the coding, but [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/35/AA_logo_black_on_white.jpg it can be viewed easily]. — BQZip01 — ^talk 04:47, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Skier Dude}} A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:PICT0172.JPG ([{{fullurl:File:PICT0172.JPG|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3APICT0172.JPG%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:PICT0172.JPG|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3APICT0172.JPG}} logs]) – uploaded by Nalco ([{{fullurl:User talk:Nalco|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Low quality image of a dog with several copyrighted book covers. Not used in the article space. Sven Manguard Wha? 06:56, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|B}} AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:8H8S.JPG ([{{fullurl:File:8H8S.JPG|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3A8H8S.JPG%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:8H8S.JPG|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3A8H8S.JPG}} logs]) – uploaded by Watashiwabakayo ([{{fullurl:User talk:Watashiwabakayo|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Focus of the image is the Eight Honors and Eight Shames, which are in the upper right corner of the poster. As the Eight Shames are cut off, making the full text unreadable, (and because the information can be communicated in text form easily) this image isn't very useful. There is also the issue of copyright to take into account, there is no evidence that the poster itself is PD. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:57, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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: no consensus - we don't normally delete images that are in use in user space (unless a user is using us for free webhosting and not contributing). If the image were causing some kind of problem, ok, fine, but it's not like we're saving on disk space by deleting the thing. --B (talk) 01:39, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:PICT1690SMALLER.JPG ([{{fullurl:File:PICT1690SMALLER.JPG|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3APICT1690SMALLER.JPG%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:PICT1690SMALLER.JPG|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3APICT1690SMALLER.JPG}} logs]) – uploaded by Cavell ([{{fullurl:User talk:Cavell|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Unidentified firearms used only on a retired (last edit 2007) editor's userpage. Sven Manguard Wha? 09:01, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

• Keep for now Its a nice shot of both pistols. It could be encyclopedic. I would ask project firearms if they can identify the guns --Guerillero | My Talk 01:34, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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, discussion closed by Drilnoth. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 21:49, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Eqn1.png ([{{fullurl:File:Eqn1.png|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5B%7B%7BFULLPAGENAME%7D%7D%23File%3AEqn1.png%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Eqn1.png|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=%3AFile%3A%7B%7Bucfirst%3AEqn1.png%7D%7D}} logs]) ::File:Eqn2.png ([{{fullurl:File:Eqn2.png|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5B%7B%7BFULLPAGENAME%7D%7D%23File%3AEqn2.png%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Eqn2.png|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=%3AFile%3A%7B%7Bucfirst%3AEqn2.png%7D%7D}} logs]) ::File:Eqn3.png ([{{fullurl:File:Eqn3.png|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5B%7B%7BFULLPAGENAME%7D%7D%23File%3AEqn3.png%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Eqn3.png|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=%3AFile%3A%7B%7Bucfirst%3AEqn3.png%7D%7D}} logs]) ::File:Eqn4.png ([{{fullurl:File:Eqn4.png|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5B%7B%7BFULLPAGENAME%7D%7D%23File%3AEqn4.png%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Eqn4.png|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=%3AFile%3A%7B%7Bucfirst%3AEqn4.png%7D%7D}} logs]) ::File:Eqn5.png ([{{fullurl:File:Eqn5.png|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5B%7B%7BFULLPAGENAME%7D%7D%23File%3AEqn5.png%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Eqn5.png|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=%3AFile%3A%7B%7Bucfirst%3AEqn5.png%7D%7D}} logs]) ::File:Eqn6.png ([{{fullurl:File:Eqn6.png|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5B%7B%7BFULLPAGENAME%7D%7D%23File%3AEqn6.png%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Eqn6.png|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=%3AFile%3A%7B%7Bucfirst%3AEqn6.png%7D%7D}} logs]) ::File:Eqn7.png ([{{fullurl:File:Eqn7.png|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5B%7B%7BFULLPAGENAME%7D%7D%23File%3AEqn7.png%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Eqn7.png|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=%3AFile%3A%7B%7Bucfirst%3AEqn7.png%7D%7D}} logs]) ::File:Eqn8.png ([{{fullurl:File:Eqn8.png|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5B%7B%7BFULLPAGENAME%7D%7D%23File%3AEqn8.png%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Eqn8.png|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=%3AFile%3A%7B%7Bucfirst%3AEqn8.png%7D%7D}} logs]) ::File:Eqn9.png ([{{fullurl:File:Eqn9.png|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5B%7B%7BFULLPAGENAME%7D%7D%23File%3AEqn9.png%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Eqn9.png|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=%3AFile%3A%7B%7Bucfirst%3AEqn9.png%7D%7D}} logs]) ::File:Eqn10.png ([{{fullurl:File:Eqn10.png|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5B%7B%7BFULLPAGENAME%7D%7D%23File%3AEqn10.png%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Eqn10.png|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=%3AFile%3A%7B%7Bucfirst%3AEqn10.png%7D%7D}} logs]) ::File:Eqn11.png ([{{fullurl:File:Eqn11.png|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5B%7B%7BFULLPAGENAME%7D%7D%23File%3AEqn11.png%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Eqn11.png|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=%3AFile%3A%7B%7Bucfirst%3AEqn11.png%7D%7D}} logs]) ::File:Eqn12.png ([{{fullurl:File:Eqn12.png|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5B%7B%7BFULLPAGENAME%7D%7D%23File%3AEqn12.png%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Eqn12.png|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=%3AFile%3A%7B%7Bucfirst%3AEqn12.png%7D%7D}} logs]) ::File:Eqn13.png ([{{fullurl:File:Eqn13.png|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5B%7B%7BFULLPAGENAME%7D%7D%23File%3AEqn13.png%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Eqn13.png|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=%3AFile%3A%7B%7Bucfirst%3AEqn13.png%7D%7D}} logs]) ::File:Eqn14.png ([{{fullurl:File:Eqn14.png|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5B%7B%7BFULLPAGENAME%7D%7D%23File%3AEqn14.png%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Eqn14.png|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=%3AFile%3A%7B%7Bucfirst%3AEqn14.png%7D%7D}} logs]) ::File:Eqn15.png ([{{fullurl:File:Eqn15.png|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5B%7B%7BFULLPAGENAME%7D%7D%23File%3AEqn15.png%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Eqn15.png|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=%3AFile%3A%7B%7Bucfirst%3AEqn15.png%7D%7D}} logs]) ::File:Eqn16.png ([{{fullurl:File:Eqn16.png|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5B%7B%7BFULLPAGENAME%7D%7D%23File%3AEqn16.png%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Eqn16.png|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=%3AFile%3A%7B%7Bucfirst%3AEqn16.png%7D%7D}} logs]) ::File:Eqn17.png ([{{fullurl:File:Eqn17.png|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5B%7B%7BFULLPAGENAME%7D%7D%23File%3AEqn17.png%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Eqn17.png|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=%3AFile%3A%7B%7Bucfirst%3AEqn17.png%7D%7D}} logs]) |uploaded by Venny85 ([{{fullurl:User talk:Venny85|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log)

Redundant and non-encyclopedic: These files are images of mathematical formula never used anywhere in Wikipedia (Redundant) and do not have any image description as to what they are (Non-encyclopedic). Fleet Command (talk) 09:22, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

:Delete, although there are used/ were used, they are easily replaceable by tex code... mabdul 09:41, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

::"Are used?" Are you sure? Because the usage log shows nothing. Oh, and all of them seem to have been uploaded on 9 May 2011. Fleet Command (talk) 18:34, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

:::Two days ago some were used (o I was able to found the rest in the same article: something with physik. I will check it!) mabdul 20:39, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

::::Okay, I found the article. [https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w/index.php?title=Heat_transfer_coefficient&action=historysubmit&diff=431063582&oldid=430646990 They] were replaced by tex code. mabdul 20:17, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

:::::Excellent. So, I take that as a green light. Fleet Command (talk) 07:00, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Skier Dude}} AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:DAC Metal Trigger Lock.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:DAC Metal Trigger Lock.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+11%23File%3ADAC+Metal+Trigger+Lock.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:DAC Metal Trigger Lock.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ADAC+Metal+Trigger+Lock.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Caea8937 ([{{fullurl:User talk:Caea8937|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Not used. Not useful. Damiens.rf 22:27, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

• Note: procedural re-nomination. Was nominated on 11 May, but nomination text was somehow lost from the listing page, probably through a Twinkle glitch. No opinion from me. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:44, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|B}} AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Earl Riley, Mayor of Portland, Oregon (1941-49).jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Earl Riley, Mayor of Portland, Oregon (1941-49).jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3AEarl+Riley%2C+Mayor+of+Portland%2C+Oregon+%281941-49%29.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Earl Riley, Mayor of Portland, Oregon (1941-49).jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3AEarl+Riley%2C+Mayor+of+Portland%2C+Oregon+%281941-49%29.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Orygun ([{{fullurl:User talk:Orygun|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Non-free photo from Getty Images showing a man, being used just to identify the man in his bio. Damiens.rf 16:39, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

• A clear and appropriate Fair Use rationale for using this photograph of Earl Riley in a biographical article specifically about him is provided with the image. Its use is covered by the U.S. “Fair Use” laws and the Wikipedia non-free content policies, because: 1) it is a photograph of a prominent individual who was mayor of Portland, Oregon; 2) the photograph has been cropped approximately 80% from the original version; and copies made from it will be of less quality; 3) the photo is necessary to identify the subject of a biographical article specifically about Earl Riley and is used in no other article; 4) its inclusion in the article adds significantly to the article because the photograph visually identifies the individual featured in the article; and 5) no other photograph is available and new photographs cannot be made since the individual shown in the photograph died in 1965. Bottomline--use of this photograph is appropriate and should not be deleted!--Orygun (talk) 23:54, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
• Comment Gotta admit I'm a little confused here. What is your rationale for deletion? It's already stated that it's non-free and it's being used for identification. The source seems to be irrelevant unless it came from another encyclopedia (which it didn't). — BQZip01 — ^talk 05:42, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
• Stating that the image is non-free is not enough to justify the use of copyrighted work. Fair use would be a much more simpler discipline if this was the case (and copyrights would be a very irrelevant set of rights for someone to possess). The source is relevant in that is tells us what's the original market role for the copyright work. In this case, it's a company that makes a living out of licensing those images for the kind of use we're using it. That means, in my humble opinion, that our free use is not fair. Of course, the discussion is open and everyone's opinion is welcome. Thanks, --Damiens.rf 16:40, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
• Wow. Talk about twisting what I stated (which was a reply to your original comment). I never said "Stating that the image is non-free is ...enough to justify the use of copyrighted work." You stated something rather cryptic in your nomination which made no sense. See below however. This is a TIME LIFE magazine image, not getty. — BQZip01 — ^talk 22:56, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
• Yes it's Getty. And you may have wanted to say Life magazine. I may have misunderstood what you say, but not twisted your words. I'm sorry in any case. --Damiens.rf 23:00, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
• The issue is that as a commercial image, used in exactly the type of place that the commercial image is licenced for, it is a clear breach of NFCC#2. While we do this where the image itself is directly discussed, we don't (see WP:CSD#F7) use them for illustration. My opinion is Delete. A non-free rationale could be constructed for an image of him from somewhere else (say [http://thephideltlegacy.com/government/state/mayors/mayors.html here]) but we don't use this type of commerical image in this type of way - Peripitus (Talk) 09:41, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
• Do not believe this is a breach of NFCC#2. The original photo shows the meeting of two people; and the original caption gives the two men equal billing. This version is cropped by 80% focusing on one of the individuals. Copyright statute specifically says that reproduction of images for purposes such as news, criticism, comment, and education are not an infringement of copyright. It goes on to lays out several factor to be considered such as the purpose and character of the use (in this case, Wikipedia provides public education) and the effect of the use upon the potential market (this should be nil for a low resolution photo that is cropped by 80%). While you say it is a clear breach of NFCC#2, I beg to disagree. In this case, an image of a historically important dead person is being used for an educational purpose; and it’s unreasonable to believe that a low resolution photo that is cropped by 80% and focuses only on one of the two main subjects of the original photo reduces the market value of the original image. Unless Wikipedia is caving in to pressure from Getty and Corbis to stop posting legitimate Fair Use images, this image should be kept on-line.--Orygun (talk) 16:14, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
• Delete as long as we must assume it's a commercial Getty image, per WP:CSD#7b. Moreover, the uploader has not made a convincing case that they have exhausted all reasonable efforts at finding a free alternative. This person was a public figure in the US, active during a time period from which many images have in the meantime fallen into the public domain. I find it extremely unlikely that there really should be no PD photographs extant of this person. Don't mayors of major cities get photographs published in newspapers pretty often? Were the local newspapers searched for such photos? Did somebody check whether those newspapers renewed their copyrights later on? Many US newspapers didn't. – If such a search really should fail, then a non-free alternative from a source less encumbered with commercial interests would be debatable. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:50, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
• :Why are we assuming it is a Getty image? It appears to be from LIFE magazine: [http://images.google.com/hosted/life/l?imgurl=e17362cb9040bd87&q=earl%20riley%20mayor%20of%20portland&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dearl%2Briley%2Bmayor%2Bof%2Bportland%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26sa%3DN%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26biw%3D1366%26bih%3D581%26tbm%3Disch] — BQZip01 — ^talk 22:53, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
• ::Life attributes it to Getty: http://www.life.com/image/50490119. --Damiens.rf 23:02, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
• Delete A better FUR for a [http://thephideltlegacy.com/government/state/mayors/mayors.html less-problematic image] is possible. — BQZip01 — ^talk 00:07, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
• How is that any better. It is just another non free image? If you want to axe this one, what is keeping you from axing that one --Guerillero | My Talk 01:38, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
• I believe a copyrighted photo would more accurately show the person than a picture of a bust, which shows only the head and in a monochrome format. In short, better options are available and should be utilized over this one. — BQZip01 — ^talk 20:17, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Drilnoth}} AnomieBOT⚡ 00:01, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Eburnation JAVRS.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Eburnation JAVRS.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3AEburnation+JAVRS.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Eburnation JAVRS.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3AEburnation+JAVRS.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Jgalt23 ([{{fullurl:User talk:Jgalt23|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Replaceable non-free image showing some medical conditions (also, I don't fully understand what the source is). Damiens.rf 16:47, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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: relisting on June 15 --B (talk) 01:42, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:ErnestLucasGuest.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:ErnestLucasGuest.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3AErnestLucasGuest.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:ErnestLucasGuest.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3AErnestLucasGuest.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by FunkyCanute ([{{fullurl:User talk:FunkyCanute|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Decorative non-free image. There's already a non-free image being used to identify the main subject of the article. We don't need to portray him in every one of his daily situations. Damiens.rf 16:51, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

:There is no good reason for deleting this image. Most biographical articles contain more than one image of the subject. Two images in one article hardly consitutes 'every one of his daily situations'. The man died aged 90. There aren't 32,850 images of him. Images are used to illustrate the subject and by having a (small) number of images, the article gains from illustrating the subject in different contexts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FunkyCanute (talk • contribs) 21:31, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Drilnoth}} AnomieBOT⚡ 00:01, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Ecofin euro presentation.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Ecofin euro presentation.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3AEcofin+euro+presentation.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Ecofin euro presentation.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3AEcofin+euro+presentation.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Ssolbergj ([{{fullurl:User talk:Ssolbergj|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Decorative non-free image of politicians showing the Euro bills. The event was important, but our bar for using non-free illustrations is higher. Damiens.rf 16:57, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 F7 by {{admin|Future Perfect at Sunrise}} AnomieBOT⚡ 20:11, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

::File:EdoardoContini.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:EdoardoContini.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3AEdoardoContini.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:EdoardoContini.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3AEdoardoContini.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Joyson Noel ([{{fullurl:User talk:Joyson Noel|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Non-free image from Reuters Images used to illustrate the subject of a bio and an event in his life. Damiens.rf 17:07, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Drilnoth}} AnomieBOT⚡ 00:01, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Edu-Boycott-1955-03.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Edu-Boycott-1955-03.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3AEdu-Boycott-1955-03.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Edu-Boycott-1955-03.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3AEdu-Boycott-1955-03.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by John Vandenberg ([{{fullurl:User talk:John Vandenberg|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Unnecessary non-free photo showing people protesting with placards, being used "To show the placards used". The discussion about this notable event needs notdoes not need a non-free picture to convey the relevant information about the placards used. Damiens.rf 17:11, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

:Could you please fix the grammar in your last sentence so I can understand it. Thank you. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 02:30, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

::I've done my best. Please, try again and let me know how bad it was. --Damiens.rf 03:15, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|B}} AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Castel Volturno massacre.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Castel Volturno massacre.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3ACastel+Volturno+massacre.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Castel Volturno massacre.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ACastel+Volturno+massacre.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Joyson Noel ([{{fullurl:User talk:Joyson Noel|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Newsworth image copied from a news source, showing a recent event used to illustrate our article about that event. Fortunately, I believe we can convey all the relevant encyclopedic information on this image with less than a thousand free words. Damiens.rf 17:23, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: Delete: What does your last statement have to do with the fact that it is a non-free image of a news agency? Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me!} 11:27, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

::I was just noticing that, beyond WP:NFCC#2, this image also fails WP:NFCC#1 and WP:NFCC#8. --Damiens.rf 16:59, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

• Keep I don't get how the use of one still interferes with the maker's ability to turn a profit. Should the image be smaller? yes. Should it be deleted? no. --Guerillero | My Talk 01:56, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Drilnoth}} AnomieBOT⚡ 00:01, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:TonyMontana.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:TonyMontana.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3ATonyMontana.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:TonyMontana.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ATonyMontana.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Joyson Noel ([{{fullurl:User talk:Joyson Noel|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Unnecessary repetitive non-free image of character. We already have images of him. Damiens.rf 17:27, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Drilnoth}} AnomieBOT⚡ 00:01, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:VincenzoLicciardi.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:VincenzoLicciardi.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3AVincenzoLicciardi.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:VincenzoLicciardi.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3AVincenzoLicciardi.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Joyson Noel ([{{fullurl:User talk:Joyson Noel|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Non-free photo copied from a newspaper showing a man being arrested. While the fact that the subject is jailed may be argued for WP:NFCC#1 compliance, this does not means we can use news sources images for our needs. Damiens.rf 17:35, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Drilnoth}} AnomieBOT⚡ 00:01, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Cosimo DiLauro.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Cosimo DiLauro.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3ACosimo+DiLauro.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Cosimo DiLauro.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ACosimo+DiLauro.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Joyson Noel ([{{fullurl:User talk:Joyson Noel|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Non-free photo copied from a newspaper showing a man being arrested. While the fact that the subject is jailed may be argued for WP:NFCC#1 compliance, this does not means we can use news sources images for our needs. Damiens.rf 17:35, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Drilnoth}} AnomieBOT⚡ 00:01, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Tommy Gioeli.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Tommy Gioeli.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3ATommy+Gioeli.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Tommy Gioeli.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ATommy+Gioeli.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Joyson Noel ([{{fullurl:User talk:Joyson Noel|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Non-free photo copied from a newspaper showing a man being arrested. While the fact that the subject is jailed may be argued for WP:NFCC#1 compliance, this does not means we can use news sources images for our needs. Damiens.rf 17:36, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|B}} AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:MarioFabbrocino.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:MarioFabbrocino.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3AMarioFabbrocino.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:MarioFabbrocino.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3AMarioFabbrocino.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Joyson Noel ([{{fullurl:User talk:Joyson Noel|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Non-free photo copied from a newspaper showing a man being arrested. While the fact that the subject is jailed may be argued for WP:NFCC#1 compliance, this does not means we can use news sources images for our needs. Damiens.rf 17:37, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

• Keep. Unique historical image, no free image available. Only newspaper journalist are present when someone is arrested or extradited. The image is low resolution and does not damage commercial use. - DonCalo (talk) 21:15, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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: not deleted - claim that it is PD seems credible. Please feel free to take it to PUI if it is not. --B (talk) 01:48, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Vallanzasca1987.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Vallanzasca1987.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3AVallanzasca1987.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Vallanzasca1987.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3AVallanzasca1987.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Joyson Noel ([{{fullurl:User talk:Joyson Noel|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Non-free photo copied from a blog, but most likely belonging to a newspaper, showing a man being arrested. While the fact that the subject is jailed may be argued for WP:NFCC#1 compliance, this does not means we can use news sources images for our needs. Damiens.rf 17:39, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: It falls under PD-Italy, as it was taken in 1987. The source is an Italian website. Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me!} 20:34, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Drilnoth}} AnomieBOT⚡ 15:06, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Vallanzasca2007.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Vallanzasca2007.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3AVallanzasca2007.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Vallanzasca2007.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3AVallanzasca2007.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Joyson Noel ([{{fullurl:User talk:Joyson Noel|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

There are free images of this guy. Damiens.rf 17:42, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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: No Consensus. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 08:43, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:BarrySealdead.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:BarrySealdead.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3ABarrySealdead.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:BarrySealdead.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ABarrySealdead.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Joyson Noel ([{{fullurl:User talk:Joyson Noel|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Unnecessary non-free image of a murder scene. Not sure what relevant information it adds to the article. Damiens.rf 17:43, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: So your argument is that the murder scene need not be illustrated, that too in the section about his death? I vote for it to be kept, unless there is a specific policy stating that graphic images must not be used. Wikipedia:IUP instead states that Shocking or explicit pictures should not be used simply to bring attention to an article. Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me!} 07:37, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

::RE: WP:IUP - I don't think it is reasonable to conclude that the photo is being used "simply to bring attention to an article". It is a photo of a murder scene in the section of the article talking about the murder. It seems more like it is being used because it clearly illustrates the material in the article text. -- Jrtayloriv (talk) 07:27, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

• Keep -- This image is illustrating the scene of a murder in a section about the murder. It is a relevant, informative low-res copy of an important historical image. -- Jrtayloriv (talk) 07:14, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Drilnoth}} AnomieBOT⚡ 00:01, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:TumacAccetturo.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:TumacAccetturo.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3ATumacAccetturo.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:TumacAccetturo.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ATumacAccetturo.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Joyson Noel ([{{fullurl:User talk:Joyson Noel|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

No source. Damiens.rf 17:48, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|B}} AnomieBOT⚡ 22:11, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:SamDeCavalcante.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:SamDeCavalcante.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3ASamDeCavalcante.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:SamDeCavalcante.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ASamDeCavalcante.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Joyson Noel ([{{fullurl:User talk:Joyson Noel|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Findagrave is not a valid source. The site's content is user-provided and they don't care much about copyright. We need to know more about an image before claiming fair use. Sites with user provided content would be used for copyright wash if we were to allow them as sources. Damiens.rf 17:51, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

• Comment Again, why is Findagrave "not a valid source". It's where we got the image and should be noted where it was found. I do NOT disagree that the image isn't copyrighted by someone else, but that certainly was its source. — BQZip01 — ^talk 05:44, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
• It's explained in the nomination: " Sites with user provided content would be used for copyright wash if we were to allow them as sources.". While some of such sites makes it easier for us to distinguish which image are actually user created (flickr comes to mind), findagrave is surely not among them. --Damiens.rf 16:50, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
• You are clearly confusing the difference between "source" and "copyright holder". — BQZip01 — ^talk 22:57, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
• Copyright holder information is important in this case to be sure we're not violating WP:NFCC#2. --Damiens.rf 23:05, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
• I never said it wasn't required, but you are using the word "source" all wrong and it is quite confusing. — BQZip01 — ^talk 00:02, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 08:44, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:EIIR-OoC.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:EIIR-OoC.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3AEIIR-OoC.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:EIIR-OoC.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3AEIIR-OoC.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Miesianiacal ([{{fullurl:User talk:Miesianiacal|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Non-free image showing important people in an important ceremony. Nevertheless, all relevant information about the ceremony event can be easily conveyed without this photo. It works more as a decoration and illustration of the tangential information of the moment. Damiens.rf 17:53, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

• Keep The imag illustrates an Order of Canada induction ceremony involving the two senior-most figures of the order: the Sovereign (the Queen) and the Chancellor and Principal Companion (the Governor General). This aligns with the section of the article Order of Canada that it illustrates: "Eligibility and appointment", showing exactly how such an event is appears, thereby significantly increassing readers' understanding of the topic. These events are private and thus no free alternative will be in existence. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 01:27, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
• Keep Good image that represents the fact of the article well. There sure are alot of pics list here that all seem to have rotational uses in them. Adding 1 ever 4 mins does not lead me to believe this were done with much forethought.Moxy (talk) 15:06, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
• Keep I could not find a free image showing the Queen investing someone in the order. As such this image passes WP:NFCI #8 historical significance. -- RP459 ^Talk/_{Contributions} 16:01, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
• I confess I fail to notice what's visually unique in the Queen investing someone in the order. How is this visually different from the mundane task of shaking hands? --Damiens.rf 16:55, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

:::RP459 said it was the historical significance of the event the image documents that makes it valuable. It's visual difference is that it is visibly different to every other image of an Order of Canada investiture. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 12:29, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

::::Correct, Thanks you said it better than I did! -- RP459 ^Talk/_{Contributions} 16:54, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

:::For me it the historical significance of the queen investing someone into the order, the ceremony will be the same if the GG does it. Investiture (in my opinion) into the order is visually different than just shaking someone's hand. -- RP459 ^Talk/_{Contributions} 21:37, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

::::This photo is not doing a good job in establishing which visual difference there is. --Damiens.rf 21:43, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

• Delete, solid chain of precedents for deleting these kinds of images. Award ceremonies of this kind are totally conventional and stereotyped. As such, nothing in the visual details of the scene shown is necessary for us to understand that the event took place and what significance it had. It only serves to make its coverage in the article more visually prominent – "purely decorative use". (Or if indeed there is something in the visual details of the image that is of some particular importance, the article at least isn't talking about it.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:18, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
• Keep, it shows the rare circumstance of Her Majesty herself bestowing the highest level of the OC award to Mr. Leger. Normally, it's the Governor General of the day who presides over the OC ceremony. I don't see a compelling reason to delete the photo. The arguments against are that the ceremony was mundane, which it most certainly was not. Photos don't have to be of LIFE magazine quality to be kept in Wikipedia. PKT(alk) 11:43, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
• Who said the ceremony was mundane? Why do we need a photo to convey the information that the Queen herself bestowed the award? --damiens.rf 15:00, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

:: You compared it to "the mundane task of shaking hands", and we are clearly in agreement that the ceremony is not mundane. PKT(alk) 16:17, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

:::Carefully re-read my post above. I asked what's the visually relevant information in this photo, since it only shows the mundane taks of shaking hands. The fact the the ceremony is far less mundane shows how this handshake photo is failing to convey any relevant information. --damiens.rf 17:21, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

• Keep - The fact that it is a rare occurence for the Queen to bestow the Order actually, in my mind, is a double-edge sword and equally undermines the fair use argument. The fact that the Governor General almost always presides over the ceremony weakens the argument that a photo of a rare occasion of the Queen doing it significantly increases readers' understanding of the topic or that its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. Moreover, even if a photo of the Queen at the ceremony were somehow key, there are other opportunities for free alternatives given that the Queen is alive (just because the ceremony is presumably by invitation only does not mean that many photos are not taken). I would add that the fact that an image is good and helps illustrate an article, or that it is visually different, are not valid legal excuses to violate copyright or recognized fair use rationales; similarly, the test is not whether there is a compelling reason to delete a photo - the onus is to show that there is a clear fair use rationale, in other words a compelling reason to keep a photo. Having said all that, I still believe that this image meets the fair use rationale given the unique and historic instance of the monarch bestowing the Order on a soon-to-be GG (largely the point being made by Miesianiacal). I don't believe that any old photo of the Queen in Canada can be justified as fair use, but the circumstances of this one are sufficiently unique and historic to meet the test in criteria 1 and 8. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:07, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
• Your argue that this images passes WP:NFCC#1 (it's "unique"), but the nomination is concerned with WP:NFCC#8. --damiens.rf 15:00, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

:::I think you need to reread what I said, and what I referred to, because I certainly expressed an opinion that went beyond "it's unique" and did speak to both 1 and 8. If it's not clear, I am happy to clarify. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 16:06, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

::::You mention 1 and 8, but you only argue for '1, by saying the circumstances (the Queen herself bestowing an award) captured in the photo are "unique and historic". An argument for 8'' would explain what's in that circumstances thats harder to understand without seeing this specific image. --damiens.rf 17:21, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

:::::Again, you seem to be focused on two words I used, and don't seem to be reading the rest. I will spell it out more clearly. As I stated (and I thought I was clear about it, but I guess not), I adopted the reasoning of Miesianiacal. To elaborate, it is an image of two key players, the monarch and her representative, in a ceremony that is at the heart of the process related to the Order. It significantly helps increase the readers' understanding of the topic as much as any fair use image on Wikipedia would. In fact, I'm not sure why you think it's historic value has nothing to do with criterion 8, given how it shows an event that aptly illustrates the monarchy's key role in the Order and also underlines the role of the GG by showing the future holder of that position. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 19:56, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

::::::I believe here is where we disagree. I don't think this image illustrates the monarch key hole in the Order as I suppose the Queen's role is not only to shake hands with other members, and this is all visual information on this photo. Yes, I fully understand she's doing a lot more, but I only know that because I read the article, and I would still perfectly know that had I read the same article without the image. --damiens.rf 20:45, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

• Delete: What is so special about the awarding of the OoC to Jules Léger that make it pass WP:NFCC#8? Nothing. It clearly fails NFCC#8 and in no way adds to the reader's understanding of the topic, besides which there is not one word of commentary about the image or even its importance relative to the topic, though that might not even be sufficient to pass NFCC#8. ww2censor (talk) 16:17, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Drilnoth}} AnomieBOT⚡ 00:01, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Egyptian leaders.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Egyptian leaders.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3AEgyptian+leaders.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Egyptian leaders.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3AEgyptian+leaders.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Sherif9282 ([{{fullurl:User talk:Sherif9282|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Unnecessary non-free image show many military people posing for a photo at an important day on their lives. The photo itself contains no relevant information about the important event in question. The removal of this photo would not be detrimental for the understanding of texts using it. Damiens.rf 17:57, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Drilnoth}} AnomieBOT⚡ 00:01, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Einstein protest.Milan Šufflay murder.NYT.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Einstein protest.Milan Šufflay murder.NYT.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3AEinstein+protest.Milan+%C5%A0ufflay+murder.NYT.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Einstein protest.Milan Šufflay murder.NYT.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3AEinstein+protest.Milan+%C5%A0ufflay+murder.NYT.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Kennechten ([{{fullurl:User talk:Kennechten|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Unnecessary non-free picture of newspaper article used just because the newspaper article is mentioned. Damiens.rf 18:23, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Drilnoth}} AnomieBOT⚡ 15:06, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Radio-operated bulldozer outside Chernobyl.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Radio-operated bulldozer outside Chernobyl.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3ARadio-operated+bulldozer+outside+Chernobyl.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Radio-operated bulldozer outside Chernobyl.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ARadio-operated+bulldozer+outside+Chernobyl.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Power.corrupts ([{{fullurl:User talk:Power.corrupts|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Unnecessary non-free photo of a radio controlled bulldozer. A radio controlled bulldozer is not the kind of thing that needs a photo to be properly understood. It looks exactly as a bulldozer without a pilot. The interesting thing about radio controlled bulldozers is not what they look like. Damiens.rf 19:20, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Drilnoth}} AnomieBOT⚡ 15:06, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:El Vocero 1978 July 25 Cerro Maravilla.JPG ([{{fullurl:File:El Vocero 1978 July 25 Cerro Maravilla.JPG|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3AEl+Vocero+1978+July+25+Cerro+Maravilla.JPG%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:El Vocero 1978 July 25 Cerro Maravilla.JPG|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3AEl+Vocero+1978+July+25+Cerro+Maravilla.JPG}} logs]) – uploaded by Mtmelendez ([{{fullurl:User talk:Mtmelendez|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Non-free newspaper cover being used just because the event discussed in the article was covered by the newspaper. Damiens.rf 19:22, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Fastily}} AnomieBOT⚡ 10:05, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah visit to Edwardes College.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah visit to Edwardes College.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3AQuaid-i-Azam+Muhammad+Ali+Jinnah+visit+to+Edwardes+College.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah visit to Edwardes College.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3AQuaid-i-Azam+Muhammad+Ali+Jinnah+visit+to+Edwardes+College.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Ishpata ([{{fullurl:User talk:Ishpata|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Unnecessary non-free scan of a news paper article covering an event on a college, used as a decoration in the article about the college. Damiens.rf 20:05, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: It is supposed to fall under [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-Pakistan PD-Pakistan]. Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me!} 10:58, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Fastily}} AnomieBOT⚡ 10:05, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:John Naka Bust.JPG ([{{fullurl:File:John Naka Bust.JPG|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3AJohn+Naka+Bust.JPG%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:John Naka Bust.JPG|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3AJohn+Naka+Bust.JPG}} logs]) – uploaded by SarahStierch ([{{fullurl:User talk:SarahStierch|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Photograph of a modern copyrighted portrait statue in a US museum, not covered by freedom of panorama. FUR claims that it "serves as the primary means of visual identification of the artwork", but the artwork is not the object of any further analysis in the article; image is used in lieu of a portrait photograph at the top of the biography article of the person depicted by the statue. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:15, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

::I've been writing articles about public artwork and fine art within museums under the GLAMWIKI banner for quite sometime. I understand the freedom of panorama law and related copyright laws. This image is being utilized because there are no other free images of Mr. Naka at this time. Until there is another image that can be utilized, I believe this image has the right to be used. Other articles utilize creative portraits to depict individuals on their biographical pages. Thanks! SarahStierch (talk) 20:23, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

::: No, sorry, "creative portraits", if they are modern and copyrighted, whether they are paintings or statues, should never be used for this purpose, because they are infringing on the copyright of a party that hasn't even any relation the purposes of our article. If you know of other articles where this is also done, please let me know; they will have to be fixed too. If you want to actually write an article (or section) about this statue, as an artwork, that would of course make a difference, but I doubt it's notable as such. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:35, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

• Delete [http://www.google.com/search?q=%22John+Naka%22&hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=HsG&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=ivnsbo&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=Fi_jTcyPG4rcgQfCut2PBg&ved=0CDUQsAQ&biw=1366&bih=581 other images exist] which are not artistic interpretations and would be more accurate. While they too would need FURs, they better represent the subject than this picture of a bust of the person. — BQZip01 — ^talk 05:47, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
• keep find other image then delete; now in honors section. Slowking4 (talk) 14:19, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
• Delete --Guerillero | My Talk 02:02, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Drilnoth}} AnomieBOT⚡ 00:01, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Quyet Thang 1975.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Quyet Thang 1975.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3AQuyet+Thang+1975.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Quyet Thang 1975.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3AQuyet+Thang+1975.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Canpark ([{{fullurl:User talk:Canpark|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

This non-free photo showing important people at an important event is not necessary for the understanding of the importante event in question. The visual information is not relevant on this case. It's just people meeting, and the removal of the image would not remove any relevant information from the article. Damiens.rf 20:16, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Drilnoth}} AnomieBOT⚡ 00:01, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Da Nang Air Base 1975.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Da Nang Air Base 1975.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3ADa+Nang+Air+Base+1975.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Da Nang Air Base 1975.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ADa+Nang+Air+Base+1975.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Canpark ([{{fullurl:User talk:Canpark|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Unnecessary non free photo of a notable historic event, the capture of an enemy base by an army. While the event captured in the photo is historic and relevant, we don't need to see this specific non-free image to properly understand the event. It just shows soldiers running in the base. Damiens.rf 20:20, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 08:45, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:RAF MAAF June 1944.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:RAF MAAF June 1944.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3ARAF+MAAF+June+1944.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:RAF MAAF June 1944.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ARAF+MAAF+June+1944.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by 489thCorsica ([{{fullurl:User talk:489thCorsica|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Replaceable drawing. Damiens.rf 20:21, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

• Keep, suggest withdrawal of nomination. As a British Government image created in 1954, it's now in the public domain. As a PD, work the book has been uploaded by the website Hyperwar [http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/UN/UK/UK-RAF-III/index.html here]. Hyperwar only publishes PD official government documents. I've just updated the image's licencing tag to indicate that its PD. Nick-D (talk) 07:35, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
• Yes, it falls under the "published more than 50 years ago" rule for works of the U.K. government. Here's the original book: http://books.google.com/books?id=fnUvAQAAIAAJ . --damiens.rf 14:37, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
• Actually, the above link is for Volume II, while what we want is Volume III. Strangely enough, Google Books dates Volume III to 1993, while Volumes I, II and IV are 1953, 1954 and 1953. Really weird. I guess Google simply misdigitalized 1953 as 1993. --damiens.rf 14:42, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

• Keep per Nick. — BQZip01 — ^talk 18:57, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
• Thanks, but I had [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:RAF_MAAF_June_1944.jpg&diff=432008279&oldid=431961109 already] tagged it as PD and updated the source. I hope you don't think it's not appropriate. --damiens.rf 00:04, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
• I think it would be much more appropriate to withdraw the nomination. — BQZip01 — ^talk 01:32, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
• Elucidate - I did it, just read above. We don't have to prefix all our comments on deletion discussions with bold one-word summaries to make them valid. --damiens.rf 05:06, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Fastily}} AnomieBOT⚡ 10:05, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:RAF Eastcote 1945.png ([{{fullurl:File:RAF Eastcote 1945.png|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3ARAF+Eastcote+1945.png%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:RAF Eastcote 1945.png|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ARAF+Eastcote+1945.png}} logs]) – uploaded by Harrison49 ([{{fullurl:User talk:Harrison49|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Wrong / unreliable source. There where no Google Earth in 1945. Damiens.rf 20:33, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

:This was sourced from the historical imagery function of Google Earth, it has also been reduced in size to meet the image guidelines. Harrison49 (talk) 20:40, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

::Could you tell me more about, or just post a link to, this part of Google Earth? I need to learn about the copyrights of its images.--Damiens.rf 20:46, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

:::I use the latest version of Google Earth (6.0.1) which includes a button to view historical imagery. For much of the area around London, imagery dated as 1 January 1945 is available, from which this image was created by myself as a screenshot, cropped and reduced in size. Copyright information comes up as The GeoInformation Group and Tele Atlas, both marked 2011. Would crediting these two beside Google Earth be more acceptable? Harrison49 (talk) 20:50, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

:::Also, should this not have been tagged for a source issue rather than for deletion? Harrison49 (talk) 20:59, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

::::Maybe. But back to the issue, I could not, in a quick research, discover what's the copyright status of these historic satellite images. I would love to know they are the work of NASA, and thus, public domain. Someone else will have to help us here. As I don't think we can use it as a non-free image. The lack of a satellite picture of a place is not detrimental to the understanding of the article about that place, and this is a requirement for non-free imagery (WP:NFCC#8). --Damiens.rf 21:08, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

:::::This was taken by an aerial survey rather than a satellite. There are no other images which cover the subject; this image in particular shows the size of the site. The site was demolished in 2008. Harrison49 (talk) 21:12, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

::::::I agree the image is irreplaceable. I dispute it's relevant. That's what WP:NFCC#8 is about. We have articles on many other no-longer-existing buildings and facilities, and they usually get along without aerial images. The size information you mention is more easily conveyed with text than with a satellite image: I for one have not a good idea of the place's size by looking at this picture. I would prefer the value in meters.

::::::But again, do you know who did operate this "aerial survey"? Was it the u.s. gov? --Damiens.rf 22:02, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

:::::::I've given you all the information I hold for this. Harrison49 (talk) 22:06, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

• I've contacted Google asking for further information. When this is received I will post it here. Harrison49 (talk) 12:40, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

::I understand they were taken by the Royal Air Force and then used by the Ordnance Survey and although marked as 1945 some are actually taken in the 1950s. It would appear that some of the airfield images had been censored due to the cold war.([http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/archive/index.php?t-103415.html not a reliable source]) MilborneOne (talk) 22:10, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

:::I received a similar reply on the Google help forum. According to [http://www.google.com/permissions/geoguidelines.html Google's guidelines], images used from Google Earth require the attribution to Google and the other suppliers identified. I have added these to the image. I believe this corrects the source issue and that this listing can now be removed or closed. Harrison49 (talk) 22:37, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

:::It may be better if the image is renamed now, to something like RAF Eastcote aerial view.png. Harrison49 (talk) 22:39, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

::::It may be better if the image is deleted, since we don't want to open a precedent for non-free aerial images in article about sites. The overwhelming majority of article about sites does not include such images and we can't say the reader understanding of these articles are compromised.--damiens.rf 22:44, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

:::::This was nominated for deletion because of a source issue; it shouldn't create a precedent but is useful for showing the size and layout of the site. Not everyone will find it useful, but I believe it is a useful addition. Harrison49 (talk) 22:48, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

• Unless you can show the image is freely licenced it fails WP:NFCC#8 because it is unnecessary to display a non-free image in order to understand the article. However, if you can prove the image is actually sourced to the RAF and produced before 1951, then it will be free and can use the {{tl|PD-UKGov}} template which would be great. ww2censor (talk) 04:25, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
• I'm still waiting for something official from Google but at the moment there's this page explaining the feature in Google Earth [http://www.google.com/earth/explore/showcase/historical.html#london]. Harrison49 (talk) 04:38, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
• Also, do any of these help? [http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2371280,00.asp], [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1230025/Google-Earth-Second-World-War-Amazing-aerial-images-taken-daring-Allies-revealed-Hitlers-weapons.html] and [http://www.gearthblog.com/blog/archives/2010/10/google_releases_more_historical_imagery.html] Harrison49 (talk) 04:40, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
• :The [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1230025/Google-Earth-Second-World-War-Amazing-aerial-images-taken-daring-Allies-revealed-Hitlers-weapons.html Daily Mail article] said the images are hosted by [http://aerial.rcahms.gov.uk/ National Collection of Aerial Photography], and [http://aerial.rcahms.gov.uk/terms/?PHPSESSID=anh9ouu3k8cr52r4p2bnfs6bq2 they say] their images is subject to Crown Copyright. Guy, the material in NCAP website is amazing! Are we taking proper advantage of this site?
• :But the bad news is the on the same Daily News article that says "Until now the pictures have been kept behind closed doors. But they are revealed to the public for the first time today...", what means, although old, it was published just 2 years ago :(
• :I would like someone else to review that. I'm not sure if all material on that wonderful website is still copyrighted. --damiens.rf 21:03, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
• ::I guess the Daily News article was only talking about the 'TARA Collection'' ([http://aerial.rcahms.gov.uk/worldwide/ The Aerial Reconnaissance Archives]). --damiens.rf 21:05, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

::::BUT, according to :commons:Commons:Licensing#Crown copyright, Crown copyright photographs created prior to 30 June 1957 have a copyright term of 50 years from creation, so the publication date of two years ago is not an issue for this particular image. However, any post-1957 images may be a problem. ww2censor (talk) 02:35, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

:::::And this is the ultimate good news we could get. Keep the image and uploadload much more like these. I suggest the creation of a special template for pre-1957 NARA images. --damiens.rf 15:40, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

::::::Surely you mean a NCAP pre-1957 photo template, though {{tl|PD-UKGov}} already covers the pre-1957 situation. NARA has nothing to do with such images or have I missed something. ww2censor (talk) 16:31, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

:::::::Just like we have templates for PD U.S. Navy images, PD U.S. Army images, PD U.S. ...., I though it could be a good idea to have one for this source as well. It could have an specific text explaining the 1957 thing and such. --damiens.rf 17:13, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

• Comment Damiens.rf, please be advised that there are no such thing as satellite images prior to the existence of the first photoreconaissance satellite, and no such thing as satellites, prior to 1957's launch of Sputnik. I think the first photorecon sats are from the 1960's, but if you take 1957 as your base date, it'd be safe to say that there are no satellite imagery prior to Sputnik I. 65.94.47.217 (talk) 04:52, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
• If there were no satellites in the 50s as you say, how did Google Earth worked back then, smartass? --damiens.rf 15:37, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

::Can {{tl|PD-UKGov}} now be used for this image? Harrison49 (talk) 15:45, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Fastily}} AnomieBOT⚡ 10:05, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Radithor1.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Radithor1.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3ARadithor1.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Radithor1.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ARadithor1.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Seduisant ([{{fullurl:User talk:Seduisant|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

No source. Also, probably replaceable by a picture take at the appropriate museum. Damiens.rf 20:35, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: Like the Summary says, "Radithor has not been manufactured since 1928, so it is likely the photograph's copyright has expired." I don't have the time nor the inclination to go to a museum and take a picture of a bottle of Radithor (if one exists), and I don't have time to find that out, either. The article about Radithor will be the worse without a picture, but it's not the end of the world if this happens. --Seduisant (talk) 20:49, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Drilnoth}} AnomieBOT⚡ 00:01, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Ralive2004.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Ralive2004.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3ARalive2004.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Ralive2004.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ARalive2004.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Deadlyfries ([{{fullurl:User talk:Deadlyfries|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Too many non-free images from a band still on the road. Damiens.rf 20:37, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Drilnoth}} AnomieBOT⚡ 00:01, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Ralive2008.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Ralive2008.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3ARalive2008.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Ralive2008.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ARalive2008.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Deadlyfries ([{{fullurl:User talk:Deadlyfries|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Too many non-free images from a band still on the road. Damiens.rf 20:37, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Drilnoth}} AnomieBOT⚡ 00:01, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Raacousticlive.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Raacousticlive.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3ARaacousticlive.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Raacousticlive.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ARaacousticlive.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Deadlyfries ([{{fullurl:User talk:Deadlyfries|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Too many non-free images from a band still on the road. Damiens.rf 20:37, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Fastily}} AnomieBOT⚡ 10:05, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Quyet Thang Squadron 1975.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Quyet Thang Squadron 1975.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3AQuyet+Thang+Squadron+1975.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Quyet Thang Squadron 1975.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3AQuyet+Thang+Squadron+1975.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Canpark ([{{fullurl:User talk:Canpark|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Unnecessary non-free image showing some pilots haply alking together. It's being used as an illustration of an important historic event these pilots where involved with, but this image of them walking together is not really helpful for the understanding of the relevant events. Damiens.rf 20:42, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

• The photograph is not just about 'some pilots happily walking together'. It portrays the individuals who were involved in the operation, namely the Bombing of Tan Son Nhat, in the same way that [File:Dolittle_Raider,_Plane_1.jpg] portrays the American individuals who took part in the Doolittle Raid. It also portray the conclusion of an operation which the North Vietnamese considered successful, and the photograph is a reflection of that. Therefore, I feel this photograph is highly relevant for the article.Canpark (talk) 12:19, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Fastily}} AnomieBOT⚡ 10:05, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Nguyen Thanh Trung defection.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Nguyen Thanh Trung defection.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3ANguyen+Thanh+Trung+defection.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Nguyen Thanh Trung defection.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ANguyen+Thanh+Trung+defection.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Canpark ([{{fullurl:User talk:Canpark|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Unnecessary non free photo of a notable historic event, the capture of an enemy base by an army. While the event captured in the photo is historic and relevant, we don't need to see this specific non-free image to properly understand the event. It just shows soldiers celebrating in the base. Damiens.rf 20:42, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

• It actually shows the defection of a South Vietnamese pilot and his aircraft to the North Vietnamese, not the capture of an air base. I feel it is necessary to provide a photograph of the event, because it provide evidence to show that the event did occur as the official Vietnamese history's description reads like propaganda. Therefore, the photograph serve as pictorial evidence.Canpark (talk) 12:09, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Fastily}} AnomieBOT⚡ 10:05, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Rahimuddin Khan.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Rahimuddin Khan.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3ARahimuddin+Khan.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Rahimuddin Khan.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ARahimuddin+Khan.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Saqib44 ([{{fullurl:User talk:Saqib44|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Non-free image of a notable man being used in articles where its role could be replaced by a free alternative. There's already a version of this photo used on his bio. Damiens.rf 20:50, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Fastily}} AnomieBOT⚡ 10:05, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Ram Thakur.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Ram Thakur.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3ARam+Thakur.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Ram Thakur.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ARam+Thakur.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Sidsahu ([{{fullurl:User talk:Sidsahu|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Replaceable non-free drawing of a notable man. Damiens.rf 20:51, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: This does not seem to be a drawing, but an edited portrait. Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me!} 11:24, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Fastily}} AnomieBOT⚡ 10:05, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Rapid brigades.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Rapid brigades.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3ARapid+brigades.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Rapid brigades.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ARapid+brigades.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Luis Napoles ([{{fullurl:User talk:Luis Napoles|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

This non-free image is copied from a political website that does not seem to care much about copyrights neutral point of view. The images shows a group of man, some of them holding bats, others crouching. The website claims it's a photo of agents of the government they don't like attacking protesters. The Wikipedia articles using this image take their words for it. If such events are factual, they should be backed up by reliable sources, and not by non-free images copied from unreliable sources that do not care about copyright infringement. Damiens.rf 21:29, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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: No Consensus. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 08:49, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:RandySept18TalkPoster.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:RandySept18TalkPoster.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3ARandySept18TalkPoster.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:RandySept18TalkPoster.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ARandySept18TalkPoster.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Fosnez ([{{fullurl:User talk:Fosnez|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Unnecessary non-free image. We don't need to see the advertising post of a lecture to understand the text about the lecture in question, no matter who important and relevant the lecture was. Damiens.rf 21:31, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

• Keep for one article. This image has apparently been used in both Randy Pausch and Really Achieving Your Childhood Dreams. At present, it's only in the Pausch article, and I agree it isn't needed there. I decided to be bold, remove the image from the Pausch article, and re-add it as the lead image for the Dreams article. In doing so, I removed a fair-use image of Pausch because the article already has a free image of him. I'm going by the precedent of film posters on WP: a fair-use image of a film poster is acceptable in an article on the film itself but not in associated articles (on the film's writer, director, etc.) The Dreams article is about the lecture, and the fair-use poster license tag allows "critical commentary on the film, event etc. in question" as well as on the image itself. DragonflyDC (talk) 03:54, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Fastily}} AnomieBOT⚡ 10:05, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Raymond Moley.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Raymond Moley.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3ARaymond+Moley.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Raymond Moley.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ARaymond+Moley.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Pelagius2 ([{{fullurl:User talk:Pelagius2|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

"copy from unknown book" is not a valid source. Also, there must be many US Gov public domain images of this guy. Also, this suggests that [http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,19330508,00.html this image] is PD. Damiens.rf 21:41, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|Fastily}} AnomieBOT⚡ 10:05, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Regan Kohl Bitburg 1985.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Regan Kohl Bitburg 1985.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3ARegan+Kohl+Bitburg+1985.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Regan Kohl Bitburg 1985.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ARegan+Kohl+Bitburg+1985.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Trident13 ([{{fullurl:User talk:Trident13|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Image from an invalid source (a geocites page) tagged as non-free and used decoratively in two articles. It shows an important man visiting an important place at an important date for important reasons, what led to important consequences. Still, no important information is lost if we remove the image. Damiens.rf 21:44, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

• Comment: I have removed the image from one of the articles (Ernst Nolte, where it was only very tangentially relevant). Noting that currently the FUR doesn't even state what article it's supposed to be for. On a side note, I find it strange that for this quite prominent event in German-US bilateral history there should be nothing either from PD-USGov sources or from the German Bildarchiv material on Commons. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:07, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.

: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 {{admin|B}} AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

::File:Reminder.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Reminder.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+May+29%23File%3AReminder.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Reminder.jpg|action=history}} history] | links | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3AReminder.jpg}} logs]) – uploaded by Otto4711 ([{{fullurl:User talk:Otto4711|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro§ion=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Unnecessary non-free image. We don't need to see a picture of a textual placard posted on a place to understand the textual placard was posted at the place. This is like using scans of newspapers to make the point some text was printed by the newspaper. Damiens.rf 21:49, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

: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.