Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 December 8: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 20:28, 14 December 2011

< December 7	December 9 >

December 8

File:PICT5171.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 as F8 by MGA73 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:09, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We have no idea what this is, and requests that the uploader give us information have not gained results. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:09, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Identified based on user contributions. Please search user contributions before nominating unidentified, potentially encyclopedic images for deletion. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:40, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

--> Commons: File:South Beach, Fremantle.jpg --MGA73 (talk) 19:06, 12 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:PICT2243 thumb.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 as F8 by MGA73 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:09, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No description, request for information sent 30 October 2011, with no response. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:15, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Identified based on user contributions. Please search user contributions before nominating unidentified, potentially encyclopedic images for deletion. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:36, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

--> Commons: File:Mastbos forest, Holland.jpg --MGA73 (talk) 19:10, 12 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:PICT2252 thumb.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 as F8 by MGA73 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:09, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No description, request for information sent 30 October 2011, with no response. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:15, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Identified based on user contributions. Please search user contributions before nominating unidentified, potentially encyclopedic images for deletion. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:37, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

--> Commons: File:Mastbos forest, Holland - 2.jpg --MGA73 (talk) 19:18, 12 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:PICT2253 thumb.jpg

No description, request for information sent 30 October 2011, with no response. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:16, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep Identified based on user contributions, but not a terribly good image. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:37, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:PICT2257 thumb.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 as F8 by MGA73 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:09, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No description, request for information sent 30 October 2011, with no response. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:16, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Identified based on user contributions. Please search user contributions before nominating unidentified, potentially encyclopedic images for deletion. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:37, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

--> Commons: File:Mastbos forest, Holland - 3.jpg --MGA73 (talk) 19:19, 12 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:PICT2258 thumb.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 as F8 by MGA73 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:09, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No description, request for information sent 30 October 2011, with no response. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:16, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Identified based on user contributions. Please search user contributions before nominating unidentified, potentially encyclopedic images for deletion. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:37, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

--> Commons: File:Mastbos forest, Holland - 4.jpg --MGA73 (talk) 19:20, 12 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:PICT3256.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 as F8 by MGA73 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:09, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No description, request for information sent 30 October 2011, with no response. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:17, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep if all that is lacking is a description, keep (decent quality), move to commons, and categorise as an unidentified plant. —innotata 23:26, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep decent quality, tentatively identified. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:44, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

--> Commons: File:Muscari 3256.jpg --MGA73 (talk) 19:24, 12 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:PICT3235.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 as F8 by MGA73 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:09, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No description, request for information sent 30 October 2011, with no response. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:17, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and move to commons. It's a guineafowl (presumably on a farm owned by Amish people), and not too bad of an image. —innotata 23:23, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep bird portrait that could be useful even if not precisely identified. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:45, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

--> Commons: File:A guineafowl on a amish farm.jpg --MGA73 (talk) 19:29, 12 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:PICT3219.JPG

No description, request for information sent 30 October 2011, with no response. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:17, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep identified sufficiently to keep based on user contribs. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:57, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Amish man with horse and buggy, 19 April 2006.JPG

No description, request for information sent 30 October 2011, with no response. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:17, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The file was moved from File:PICT3273.JPG to File:Amish man with horse and buggy, 19 April 2006.JPG by DragonflySixtyseven (talk · contribs) at 16:43, 9 December 2011 (UTC). AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:08, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The image is described somewhat now, though it is somewhat low quality no apparent reason to delete. —innotata 23:25, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep reasonable quality, sufficiently described. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:58, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:PICT3347.JPG

No description, request for information sent 30 October 2011, with no response. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:18, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not great quality, probably not possible to positively identify without more detail on the flowers. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:03, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:PICT3412.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 as F8 by MGA73 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:09, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No description, request for information sent 30 October 2011, with no response. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:18, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep if all that is lacking is a description, keep (decent quality), move to commons, and categorise as an unidentified plant. —innotata 23:28, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep these look like cherry blossoms to me, could be positively identified by someone who knows more. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:13, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

--> Commons: File:Unidentified tree 3412.jpg --MGA73 (talk) 19:40, 12 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:PICT3420.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 as F8 by MGA73 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:09, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No description, request for information sent 30 October 2011, with no response. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:18, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep if all that is lacking is a description, keep (decent quality), move to commons, and categorise as an unidentified plant. —innotata 23:28, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Would be identifiable by someone who knows about common ornamental flowers. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:12, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

--> Commons: File:Unidentified flowers 3420.jpg --MGA73 (talk) 19:46, 12 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:Pretty pinkish-purple flowers.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 as F8 by MGA73 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:09, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No description, request for information sent 30 October 2011, with no response. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:18, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The file was moved from File:PICT3423.JPG to File:Pretty pinkish-purple flowers.JPG by DragonflySixtyseven (talk · contribs) at 17:45, 9 December 2011 (UTC). AnomieBOT ⚡ 19:09, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep if all that is lacking is a description, keep (decent quality), move to commons, and categorise as unidentified flowers. —innotata 23:28, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

--> Commons: File:Pretty pinkish-purple flowers.jpg --MGA73 (talk) 19:53, 12 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:PICT3473.JPG

No description, request for information sent 30 October 2011, with no response. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:19, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is St. Patrick's Cathedral (New York) (see note indicating "new york" in upload - basically the most impressive church in new york, so not hard to figure out). Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:06, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:PICT3493.JPG

No description, request for information sent 30 October 2011, with no response. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:19, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is the GE Building (compare with this image). Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:11, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Uploader made six edits in 2006, and nothing since. Image will never be used. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:51, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Me and katie.jpg

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 07:32, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Last edit was blanking his userpage in 2010, so it's clear he dosen't intend on coming back. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:50, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Me and waters.jpg

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 07:33, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep User is still active, so I'm uncomfortable with this FfD unless the user says getting rid of it is okay. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:52, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Me only.jpg

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 07:37, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Uploader has two edits from years ago and nothing since, this will never be used. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:53, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Me overview.png

Orphaned diagram. Kelly ^hi! 07:37, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Me really really tired.JPG

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 07:38, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Me shorter hair.JPG

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 07:39, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Me singing.jpg

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 07:40, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Me singing.jpg

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 07:40, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Me st thomas.JPG

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 07:42, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Me with dog.jpg

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 07:42, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Me, motion city style.jpg

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 07:46, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Me-and-Kenji-1.jpg

Orphan, probably nonfree. Kelly ^hi! 07:49, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Me-Phi-Me.jpg

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 07:49, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Me88png.PNG

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 07:56, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Meadowslogo.jpg

Orphaned logo. Kelly ^hi! 07:56, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Meandcat.PNG

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 07:57, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:MeAndWill.jpg

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 07:58, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Meatevaperontomb.jpg

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 07:58, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mebenchce2.jpg

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 08:00, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is the uploader's only contribution to the project, and is from many years ago. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:55, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Med.jpg

Orphan, unencyclopedic. Kelly ^hi! 08:02, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Media kit banner.jpg

Orphan, unencyclopedic. Kelly ^hi! 08:04, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Meditating Dragon by Tetsumonchi.png

Orphan, unencyclopedic. Kelly ^hi! 08:06, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hugo Chávez (1992 Coup Surrender).jpg

Relisting per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 December 1. I abstain. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:08, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the sources brought up at the DRV --Guerillero | My Talk 05:44, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. At the previous FfD, I argued for delete, based on NFCC#8 grounds. At this point, I'm neutral, because it's only a frame capture from a TV broadcast, so it strikes me as very unlikely to replace the original market role for the copyright holder. However, the DRV, which I just saw, really mis-characterized what I had said, and I'm not seeing new sources that really change the NFCC status. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:16, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why would that make you neutral? Even if it passes WP:NFCC2, it still has to pass NFCC8 as well. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:16, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, since you ask... because it's not that big a deal to me. But, logically, you are definitely correct that failing #8 does not get a pass just because we aren't too worried about market role replacement. For the benefit of the poor closer, who has to read what I've written here (sorry!), let's say I'm leaning delete. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:36, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NFCC8. To the extent this is being used to illustrate Chavez's trademark look, we can illustrate this look using other free images, or with text alone. There is no need to use this particular nonfree image of Chavez. Even an important photo has to pass all of the NFCC, and this one is replaceable with text ("Hugo Chavez wore his trademark red beret and a military uniform when he announced...") or a free image. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:15, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This is non-notable image of a notable moment in history. As argued above and elsewhere, the role intended for this image in the article can be fulfilled by already available free imagery. --damiens.rf 19:38, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep I've argued at length for this image elsewhere, but just to clear up some remaining misconceptions:
1. This image is not "being used to illustrate Chavez's trademark look." For one thing, at the time that this image was taken Chávez was essentially unknown and did not have a "trademark look." If anything, this image depicts the construction of Chávez's image in and through the media.
2. This is not a "non-notable image of a notable moment in history" in that what is notable is not so much the event in itself (Chávez's surrender) as the fact that it is broadcast live, on national television.
In other words, it is its transmission as a televised image that makes this event notable. This is what impresses the event, and its figurehead Hugo Chávez, into public consciousness as he famously says (to a now national audience) that the attempt to transform the country is to be given up "for now" ("por ahora"). Otherwise, it would have been just another coup attempt among many (and not even the only one in that country in that year).
For sources, see those brought up at the DRV, or basically any biography of Hugo Chávez. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 22:48, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The broadcasting was arguably an important event, but we don't need this or any other image to explain that. --damiens.rf 16:52, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - About sources, I've read the DRV, and I'm really not seeing any cogent argument that there are new sources that change the situation. Maybe there are, and they just haven't been explained clearly enough, but all I see is a few editors repeatedly saying that there are new sources that change everything, without saying what the sources are, or what of relevance to NFCC they illustrate. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:50, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
NFCC #8 is inherently subjective. If a subject expert and a Wikipedia administrator says that it passes it, I am inclined to go along with him. As it clearly meets the rest of the criteria, this is a clear keep for me. A question for those arguing to delete: how many biographies of Hugo Chavez have you taken a look at? NW (Talk) 18:54, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Straightforward NFCC #8 failure, which states "if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding". A convincing argument that this screencap is essential to the article has not been made. He tried a coup, it failed, he gave a press conference. Notable event. An image of him in mid-speech? Not so much. Tarc (talk) 20:28, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Navsea logo.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by King of Hearts (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:03, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OB NAVSEA_logo.jpg Hitokage (talk) 09:24, 8 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:HOWSunDance.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 as F7 by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:05, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Storyboard drawing from a TV episode, used in episode infobox. FUR claims that it is used for "illustrating the steps taken to shoot a particular scene of the episode described by the article" – but the article contains not a word of discussion of the shooting of this particular scene. This was recently substituted for another screenshot image that was also not embedded in any analytical commentary and had a meaningless boilerplate rationale. This new one is no improvement over the other; it's still just another example of a random image stuck into the infobox merely for the sake of having an image. Fails NFCC#8. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:36, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, nemesis. I knew you would pop up again. Thank you for stalking me as I really haven't seen you want to delete anything from anyone else in the past few days. I will remove the image from the article and will no longer upload any images for episode articles, unless I see actual production discussions on the internet. Good luck stalking someone else and not making them feel welcome. I would ask wtf a NFCC is since you love you wave that flag but I really don't care at this point nor will return to discuss this particular matter.— A very disgusted WylieCoyote (talk) 14:50, 8 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:DCIFeaturedPhoto.jpg

Same reason as commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Christophernewman#Self-portrait photos. Saibo (Δ) 13:24, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Meemeepoora.gif

Orphan, unencyclopedic. Kelly ^hi! 14:04, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mef.jpg

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 14:05, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sicko British National Health Service.jpg

Screenshot of Michael Moore talking to a doctor. Fails WP:NFCC#8 in that it really doesn't significantly add to the reader's understanding of the topic (the film Sicko). Kelly ^hi! 14:07, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mefind.jpg

Orphaned screenshot. Kelly ^hi! 14:09, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Meforcliff1.JPG

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 14:10, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Megan ms.jpg

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 14:10, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Megannaz.jpg

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 14:12, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It took 5 YEARS for this to be deleted? No encyclopedic value of any kind obviously. Wildthing61476 (talk) 14:14, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Meghanpicture.jpg

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 14:13, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Megs Done1.jpg

Orphan, likely nonfree. Kelly ^hi! 14:14, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:MeInUniform2.jpg

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 14:17, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:MeKidsSmall.JPG

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 14:21, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mel-winfield.jpg

Orphan, unencyclopedic. Kelly ^hi! 14:22, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Meladina1a.jpg

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 14:22, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Meladina1aa.jpg

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 14:23, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Members.jpg

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 14:27, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Menleesy.jpg

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 14:29, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Menleesy.jpg

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 14:30, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Meowlookie angelstar .jpg

Orphan, unencyclopedic. Kelly ^hi! 14:31, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Meowlookie angelstar.jpg

Orphan, unencyclopedic. Kelly ^hi! 14:32, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rees.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 as F9 by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:05, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: orphaned image of Fernando Rees added and removed from the article back in 2007 with a claim that the image was not properly sourced per this edit and this complaint by an anon IP, re added, removed and readded again but eventually replaced in Sept 2010 by the better image that is now being used, so this will likely never to be used again. ww2censor (talk) 15:36, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: the current image under this filename is not the same as the one identified as a copyvio in 2007. However, it is the same image as the one that was the object of the second and third deletion, in 2008, and the copyright claim made now (own work by uploader J carlos23 (talk · contribs)) is incompatible with the source information provided by the same uploader before those deletions (sourced to some websites and "for Wikipedia use only"), so we must assume it too is a copyvio. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:50, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I found this image history which explains things as this image has been deleted by you. So close it. ww2censor (talk) 17:22, 8 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:3-(4-ethoxyphenyl)prop-2-enoic acid.PNG + 22 others

Orphaned file, only used in user space - those pages not been edited since April 2008, WP:NOTHOST Ronhjones ^(Talk) 21:41, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Alpha-Methylphenethylamine-ifa2.png + 16 others

Orphaned file, only used in user space, uploader long gone, WP:NOTHOST Ronhjones ^(Talk) 22:32, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mikeal.jpg

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 22:32, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mikehood.jpg

Orphaned band picture. Kelly ^hi! 23:04, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 256: / Line 256: @@
 ***About sources, I've read the DRV, and I'm really not seeing any cogent argument that there are new sources that change the situation. Maybe there are, and they just haven't been explained clearly enough, but all I see is a few editors repeatedly saying that there are new sources that change everything, without saying what the sources are, or what of relevance to NFCC they illustrate. --[[User:Tryptofish|Tryptofish]] ([[User talk:Tryptofish|talk]]) 22:50, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
 *NFCC #8 is inherently subjective. If a subject expert and a Wikipedia administrator says that it passes it, I am inclined to go along with him. As it clearly meets the rest of the criteria, this is a clear '''keep''' for me. A question for those arguing to delete: how many biographies of Hugo Chavez have you taken a look at? '''<font color="navy">[[User:NuclearWarfare|NW]]</font>''' ''(<font color="green">[[User talk:NuclearWarfare|Talk]]</font>)'' 18:54, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
+*'''Delete''' - Straightforward NFCC #8 failure, which states "''if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding''".  A convincing argument that ''this'' screencap is essential to the article has not been made.  He tried a coup, it failed, he gave a press conference.  Notable event.  An image of him in mid-speech?  Not so much. [[User:Tarc|Tarc]] ([[User talk:Tarc|talk]]) 20:28, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 ====[[:File:Navsea logo.jpg]]====