Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 May 16
Appearance
- Non-free image used to show what can be adequately explained with (free) text. We don't need an image to understand that Yamcha and Tien appeared in combination Jay32183 (talk) 01:56, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Justin Foote (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Gratuitous use of nonfree media: appears only in gallery and not discussed directly in article text. Article contains 5 nonfree images. Beautiful artwork, but excessive. DurovaCharge! 04:41, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Justin Foote (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Gratuitous use of nonfree media: appears only in gallery and not discussed directly in article text. Article contains 5 nonfree images. Beautiful artwork, but excessive. DurovaCharge! 04:42, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Justin Foote (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Gratuitous use of nonfree media: appears only in gallery and not discussed directly in article text. Article contains 5 nonfree images. Beautiful artwork, but excessive. DurovaCharge! 04:42, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Skier Dude (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Shadows an image from Commons. We could easily protect this page against creation if it is a concern. -- Luk talk 10:16, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Speedy Delete the image and salt the page if need be but as it is now, it's preventing an image by the same name at Commons from being used. - ALLST✰R▼echo wuz here @ 17:30, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Very low quality, no source. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 19:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Unencyclopedic, used only in a possible hoaxed article. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 20:32, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Tamas Szabo (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Looking at the page history, it appears that the uploader may not have understood the real meaning of the GFDL tag... it looks like the text was copied from somewhere and the tag was created because of that. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 20:41, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Copyright violation. The uploader claims it's free (the first time he uploaded it he tagged it as CC-BY-3.0, the second time as PD), but as far as I know this and most other well-known lolcat images sitting around online are copyrighted. I deleted this once, and the uploader re-uploaded it, so I'm listing it here. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:18, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
'If' it was posted on 4chan then its good to use... but seeing as content on 4chan lasts no more than 20 mins....--Nialljames (talk) 21:26, 16 May 2009 (UTC)