Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2007 November 20: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
m →Image:02tree.600.jpg: sign |
|||
Line 89: | Line 89: | ||
:*'''Speey Keep''' The image page isn't empty, the description is there as is the image, its just the description is copied over from commons. I have an updated version as well which is in the works. I'm not sure why this was transfered to commons to be honest as its not a great diagram and its in english but nevermind. Absoutely perplexed as to why you'd want to delete it.[[User:WikipedianProlific|WikipedianProlific]][[User_Talk:WikipedianProlific|<sup>(Talk)</sup>]] 21:44, 20 November 2007 (UTC) |
:*'''Speey Keep''' The image page isn't empty, the description is there as is the image, its just the description is copied over from commons. I have an updated version as well which is in the works. I'm not sure why this was transfered to commons to be honest as its not a great diagram and its in english but nevermind. Absoutely perplexed as to why you'd want to delete it.[[User:WikipedianProlific|WikipedianProlific]][[User_Talk:WikipedianProlific|<sup>(Talk)</sup>]] 21:44, 20 November 2007 (UTC) |
||
:The person above, blanked the page himself in [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Image%3ATridentMissileSystem.png&diff=171413826&oldid=170923081 this edit]... beats me why you are so intent on keeping a blank page. [[User:Jackaranga|Jackaranga]] ([[User talk:Jackaranga|talk]]) 22:17, 20 November 2007 (UTC) |
:The person above, blanked the page himself in [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Image%3ATridentMissileSystem.png&diff=171413826&oldid=170923081 this edit]... beats me why you are so intent on keeping a blank page. [[User:Jackaranga|Jackaranga]] ([[User talk:Jackaranga|talk]]) 22:17, 20 November 2007 (UTC) |
||
:: Because I'm going to upload an updated version shortly (e.g. a week or maybe 2) ;) [[User:WikipedianProlific|WikipedianProlific]][[User_Talk:WikipedianProlific|<sup>(Talk)</sup>]] 00:28, 21 November 2007 (UTC) |
|||
====[[:Image:Bhairu SS.jpg]]==== |
====[[:Image:Bhairu SS.jpg]]==== |
Revision as of 00:28, 21 November 2007
November 20
- Michael.belanger (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Copyvio of http://www.ichotels-emea.com/ic/middle_east/dubai/index.php# Samuell Lift me up or put me down 00:35, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Does OTRS have this permission logged while the image is orphan? Jusjih (talk) 01:04, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- orphan TJRC (talk) 01:21, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- orphan TJRC (talk) 01:21, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- orphan TJRC (talk) 01:21, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Only used in now-deleted article. No other use likely. Tyrenius (talk) 01:43, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Firsr tagged PD-self but then the uploader asked for deletion. Need comments. Jusjih (talk) 02:17, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Copyright infringement: A scan from A Field Guide to the Birds of Hawaii and the Tropical Pacific by D. Pratt, P. Bruner and D. Berrett Rabo3 (talk) 01:52, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Copyright infringement: From a Field Guide to the Birds of Hawaii and the Tropical Pacific by D. Pratt, P. Bruner and D. Berrett Rabo3 (talk) 02:06, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Copyright infringement: Photo taken by Jack Jeffrey, and all his photos are copyright protected; see statement on his page here Rabo3 (talk) 02:12, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Copyright infringement: Photo taken by Jack Jeffrey, and all his photos are copyright protected; see statement on his page here Rabo3 (talk) 02:18, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Copyright probs (again; see previous uploads requests for deletion!): This illustration by - and copyrighted to - Sheryl Ives-Boynton Rabo3 (talk) 02:26, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yet another copyrighted illustration uploaded by this user. This illustration by - and copyrighted to - Sheryl Ives-Boynton Rabo3 (talk) 02:31, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yet another copyrighted illustration uploaded by this user (see previous 6 deletion requests). This illustration by - and copyrighted to - Sheryl Ives-Boynton Rabo3 (talk) 02:34, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Copyright infringement: Photo taken by Jack Jeffrey, and all his photos are copyright protected; see statement on his page here. It is worth noting that users 120740a and Barati11 (see previous removal requests) appear to be heavily involved in the same articles and make remakably similar edits Rabo3 (talk) 04:00, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Haljordan9 (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- picture is listed under fair use but is not currently being used in any article, so the image must be deleted Anakinjmt (talk) 04:09, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- IslaamMaged126 (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- CV - License does not satisfy the image, which is a gigantic screenshot of Nightmare Before Christmas off Youtube. In addition, image quality is poor, but file size is massive (over 1 meg). Limited or no use in illustrating subject. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 07:41, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Biffonator (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- LQ, CV - Displays copyright holder's name in the image, is off low enough quality that it is impossible to distinguish the subject. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 08:10, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Orphaned and non-encyclopedic. I created this image, and the article for which it was used has been AFD'ed. Image serves no purpose outside it's original intent. CSD doesn't seem to apply. Yngvarr 13:44, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- BenFrantzDale (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Empty image description page for an image that is located on the commons, I had tagged for speedy deletion like is customary, but User:WikipedianProlific disagrees for some reason and removed the tag. Jackaranga (talk) 15:45, 20 November 2007 (UTC) Jackaranga (talk) 15:45, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- comment: User:WikipedianProlific was the original author according to the Original upload log, at 2007-03-19 15:05; someone else moved it to the commons. AFAICS commons page is non-empty with GFDL-self-no-disclaimers and usual stuff. I cannot see what the problem is, requiring deletion. Rwendland (talk) 17:34, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Speey Keep The image page isn't empty, the description is there as is the image, its just the description is copied over from commons. I have an updated version as well which is in the works. I'm not sure why this was transfered to commons to be honest as its not a great diagram and its in english but nevermind. Absoutely perplexed as to why you'd want to delete it.WikipedianProlific(Talk) 21:44, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- The person above, blanked the page himself in this edit... beats me why you are so intent on keeping a blank page. Jackaranga (talk) 22:17, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Because I'm going to upload an updated version shortly (e.g. a week or maybe 2) ;) WikipedianProlific(Talk) 00:28, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
- Jaisingh rathore (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Terribly pixilated; unlikely to be used in any article. Shell babelfish 17:19, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Luke Farrelly (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphan and unencyclopedic image, it's companion article was speedy deleted as non-notable Maelwys (talk) 21:05, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Luke Farrelly (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphan and unencyclopedic image, it's companion article was speedy deleted as non-notable Maelwys (talk) 21:06, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Luke Farrelly (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphan and unencyclopedic image, it's companion article was speedy deleted as non-notable Maelwys (talk) 21:06, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- This non-free image (Wikipedia only) should be deleted for two reasons: (1) a Dutch court ruled that the tree will not be cut down [1], so the argument that the image is "historical" is no longer valid; (2) there is an alternative image (Image:Amsterdam Panaroma.jpg) of the tree. – Ilse@ 21:23, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Comment - The judge issued a temporary injunction, Ilse, and the question of whether it will remain is still up in the air. It seems silly and premature to delete the only decent pic we have at this juncture. Jeffpw (talk) 23:06, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- KEEP - We have the written permission of the photographer to use the photo. The image that Ilse points to is a panorama of the city, and any one of hundreds of trees could be the tree in question. The photo uploaded (by me) is clearly the tree in question. I went to a lot of trouble to obtain a picture, first going to the Anne Frank house, then talking to media relations to take my own picture. Permission was denied, with the explanation that AP and Reuters have a photo, and we could use theirs. I then contacted the NYTimes photographer who took a picture and he granted us permission. Fair use is satisfied in this manner.Jeffpw (talk) 22:37, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Keep - Obtaining a picture that shows the same information as this one (depicts the whole tree), is not feasible as the item pictured is in an access restricted area. Used with permission, too. User:Krator (t c) 23:00, 20 November 2007 (UTC)