Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 December 23

< December 22	December 24 >

December 23

File:Sign post coat of arms.png

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Old, failed proposal from 2010. Not useful for anything anymore. — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:03, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:P2070245.JPG

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, unidentified subject. Kelly ^hi! 00:14, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Cyprus Proposal.png

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently an a priori flag design: i.e. original research. Not needed. — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:35, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Todaler outside.jpg.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, watermark indicates that this probably isn't free. No encyclopedic value. Sven Manguard Wha? 01:24, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:1 state TCM.svg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unencyclopedic and unused. Stefan2 (talk) 02:10, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:1000CausalSetPoints.png

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and unencyclopedic. Stefan2 (talk) 02:23, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:180px-Prithvi Raj Chauhan.JPG

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:05, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Prithvi Raj Chauhan.JPG is better. Stefan2 (talk) 02:26, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The two are the same image, except that the one up for deletion is needlessly smaller and poorly compressed. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:37, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, that's what I meant. And if you want a small image, all you need is to use [[File:Prithvi Raj Chauhan.JPG|180px]]. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:39, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete could be speedily deleted as a duplicate image, and fails to credit author. —innotata 02:35, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Force-Latest-Movie-Stills-8.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:05, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I do not believe this non-free image adds anything not seen in the other images already present, and therefore fails the NFCC. Not listing under speedy, despite being orphaned, because I just removed it from the page. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:04, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't it be useful in the John Abraham (actor) page under the "Acting" section? X.One ^SOS 08:29, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we could use it there. Per Wikipedia:NFCC #8 "Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.". We have a free image of the actor, and if people want to see him in costume they can click on the link to the movie and look at the movie poster. Only in the rarest of circumstances are non-free images of an actor in costume used on the actor's page, per the NFCC. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:36, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Movies es5-20030823.png

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't a screenshot of one of the movies, it's a screenshot of a non-free desktop filled with folders containing those movies. Does not add to the understanding of the article that it is in. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:32, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Unitedstatestoday.gif

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:05, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No clue what the color-coding might mean. Also watermarked with a URL which has a clear copyright statement [1]. — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:54, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Their use statement isn't exactly a free license. Anyway, it's a moot point, since the image is useless. — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:56, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:San Diego train station.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:05, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A higher resolution version of this exists on Commons as File:PacificSurfliner.jpg. I think both versions are properly licensed but there's no need to keep this lower-resolution version. I've replaced all the local uses with the commons file. Mackensen (talk) 13:59, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The other version is higher-quality and has absolute guarantee of free use; this one has a tiny bit of question remaining (although it appears Jepler is the original author as claimed.) Pi.1415926535 (talk) 17:28, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Don-2-3d-poster-shahrukh-khan-srk-04.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:05, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is no reason for two non-free movie posters of the same movie in the same article. This is the second one, so I think it should go per the NFCC 3a and 8. Sven Manguard Wha? 14:18, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is a 3D poster, the other one is 2D. The main attraction of the film is its 3D conversion, which is a hot topic in the media. So, the image serves the purpose of illustrating it. What's wrong with that? Btw, we are having a discussion on whether to remove the 2D poster and replace it with this or not. The 3D image, after being placed in the infobox can be supported by a caption, which describes any part of the 3D conversion. A few sentences, perhaps. Featured articles like Taare Zameen Par show a similar structure. I don't think this image should be deleted. X.One ^SOS 14:27, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Taare Zameen Par has one movie poster. This article has two. Very few articles on movies use two non-free movie posters. If the posters themselves were notable, and that is covered by sources, then it could be justified. If not, it's flooding of non-free images. Sven Manguard Wha? 15:37, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it - Again! I don't think the need for image should be deleted. 3D film may be common in Western countries, but not in India. 3D posters are made available first time for any film in India, so it is required for the article to be perfect. -- Karthik Nadar 14:45, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Should be kept for the same reasons Secret of success and Karthikndr have stated, the poster is a 3D which is not common in India (only 3 film have been made in 3D so far) and it is really a first to have a 3D poster for a Bollywood film-like the very first. Ever. It's very much needed for the article. I truly believe that it should not be deleted. Meryam90 (talk) 00:10, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All the 3D posters of the film can be found here. X.One ^SOS 07:26, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, leaning delete. It seems to me that the arguments for keeping based on 3D would only be valid for an article that is actually about the 3D poster itself. --Tryptofish (talk) 15:42, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Same thing, this is a rare 3d poster of an Indian film. --Extra 999 (Contact ^me) 15:19, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:MySQL Manager screenshot.png

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:05, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Despite being the software screenshot for the article, I actually think that it fails NFCC #8. Sven Manguard Wha? 14:46, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Showing the interface to an application is critical to understanding the function of the program in question. Removal of all of the screenshots of the application would necessitate a full text description of what was removed in order to keep the same context that an image can simply provide. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 17:53, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. In this case, the image seems to be the same as any of a great number of similar displays that anyone can see in the course of using a computer. I don't really think it adds anything that cannot be just as well conveyed by text. --Tryptofish (talk) 15:45, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:StuffIt Expander window.png

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Keep. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 06:14, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The new minimalist design is not very different from the already present logo, File:StuffIt Expander.png, so I don't see a reason for it in the article (it's non-free). Sven Manguard Wha? 15:38, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Showing the interface to an application is critical to understanding the function of the program in question and it's relation to the user. Removal of all of the screenshots of the application would necessitate a full text description of what was removed in order to keep the same context that an image can simply provide. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 17:54, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, and delete the other file. Here, the issue is minimum use of non-free media, and I think that the nominator has a good case for one file instead of two. However, the file nominated (unlike the nomination just above this one) is specific and informative about the subject of the page where it is used. It's also a logo. However, the nominated file actually conveys more relevant information than does the file that the nominator proposes to keep, so I would delete the other one, not this one. --Tryptofish (talk) 15:50, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:ScepterAndVenus.gif

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, lacking a clear description, despite a 1 month old request. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:31, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Penis percentile 2.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Obsolete image, orphan. No indication of data source used for study. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:04, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:St Jean Cap Ferrat sculpture.JPG

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No freedom of panorama in France I'm afraid. Sculpture isn't that old. multichill (talk) 21:19, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Fuzzynumber.gif

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: Withdrawn. -FASTILY ^{Happy 2012!!} 05:17, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Low Quality, Unencyclopedic, no foreseeable use. FASTILY_s ^(TALK) 21:24, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:SpeakerScheer.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:05, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Source[2] Under Canadian Crown Copyright which does not allow for commercial use. As noted here permission to reproduce is required. maclean (talk) 22:26, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non-free image of a living person. —innotata 01:22, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.