Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 September 29: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 19:35, 29 September 2011

< September 28	September 30 >

September 29

File:CR60Eastbound.jpg

Orphaned, unidentified subject. One can infer from details in the picture that it's a County Route 60 somewhere in New York state, but otherwise, who knows. Would support moving to Commons only if location can be positively identified. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:29, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Commons - It's a county road in Rockland County, New York, and as soon as I fix all the details, I'm moving it to the commons. ----DanTD (talk) 19:33, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:CR35&CR60Junction.jpg

Orphaned, low quality. No sense moving it to Commons, because it's still very blurry even after what appears to be an attempt at correcting it. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:30, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Commons - The image is visible enough to be identified, and it has been already. ----DanTD (talk) 19:34, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Oldpepsi newpepsi.JPG

Derivative work of copyrighted product art, as the labels are unquestionably the subject of this image. Technically, this image qualifies for speedy deletion as a copyright violation (F9), but it seems only fair to give someone a shot at converting this to non-free with a suitable fair use rationale. If this image is changed to non-free with a suitable rationale, this discussion may be closed early by any administrator. SchuminWeb (Talk) 02:48, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:NewWildCherryPepsiCan.jpg

Derivative work of copyrighted product art, as the labels are unquestionably the subject of this image. Technically, this image qualifies for speedy deletion as a copyright violation (F9), but it seems only fair to give someone a shot at converting this to non-free with a suitable fair use rationale. If this image is changed to non-free with a suitable rationale, this discussion may be closed early by any administrator. SchuminWeb (Talk) 02:50, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:7riyat-Final-.jpg

Fails WP:NFCC#10. Non-free that is not significant and doesn't add to the value of the article. Rafy talk 08:20, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Weeks of the Dedication of the Church.jpg

Personal file. Looks like the screenshot of a calendar issued by the church. No encyclopedia use. Sreejith K (talk) 10:21, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mackey Martin.jpg

Unidentified individual. No foreseeable use. Fleet Command (talk) 11:29, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:E-Mail tab of Windows Live Toolbar.jpg

I ran into this file during my renaming duties; however, I believe this screenshot shows either the now-deprecated Windows Live Toolbar, a copyright-protected work of Microsoft Corporation.

It lacks a fair use rationale, it is not used in any article and has no foreseeable encyclopedic use. Fleet Command (talk) 12:29, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Human-shield21a.jpg

Violates WP:NFCC #2 and #3 nableezy - 16:09, 29 September 2011 (UTC) 16:09, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As it was collected and posted by the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center in their old website, it does not violate the fair-use laws. The documentation of at least 4 cases of human shield cases make it relevant to the article Human shield as an historic non-replaceable image. I oppose the delete. MathKnight 16:19, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use laws in the United States are a bit more loose than the non-free content criteria here on Wikipedia, though I fail to understand the point that because ITIC posted the pictures it means that this is a valid claim of fair use. Additionally, these photos may have been collected by ITIC, but they are not owned by ITIC, so what they did with these pictures is not really relevant to the question. nableezy - 18:03, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The point was that since a law-abiding institute does a fair use Wikipedia can too. I understand that you claim that since it is a collection of 4 pictures, the use is problematic. If we choose one picture out of the four, will you remove your objection? MathKnight 18:28, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 :<span class="plainlinks nourlexpansion lx">[[:File:CR35&CR60Junction.jpg]] ([{{fullurl:File:CR35&CR60Junction.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3AFiles+for+deletion%2F2011+September+29%23File%3ACR35%26CR60Junction.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | [[File talk:CR35&CR60Junction.jpg|talk]] | [{{fullurl:File:CR35&CR60Junction.jpg|action=history}} history] | [[Special:WhatLinksHere/File:CR35&CR60Junction.jpg|links]] | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ACR35%26CR60Junction.jpg}} logs])</span> – uploaded by [[User talk:Airtuna08#File:CR35&CR60Junction.jpg listed for deletion|Airtuna08]] (<span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:User talk:Airtuna08|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro&section=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify]</span> | [[Special:Contributions/Airtuna08|contribs]] | [[Special:ListFiles/Airtuna08|uploads]] | [[Special:Log/upload/Airtuna08|upload log]]).
 Orphaned, low quality.  No sense moving it to Commons, because it's still very blurry even after what appears to be an attempt at correcting it. [[User:SchuminWeb|SchuminWeb]] ([[User talk:SchuminWeb|Talk]]) 01:30, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
-:'''Move to Commons''' - The image is visible enough to be identified, and it '''has been'' already. ----[[User:DanTD|DanTD]] ([[User talk:DanTD|talk]]) 19:34, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
+:'''Move to Commons''' - The image is visible enough to be identified, and it ''has been'' already. ----[[User:DanTD|DanTD]] ([[User talk:DanTD|talk]]) 19:34, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 ====[[:File:Oldpepsi newpepsi.JPG]]====