Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 October 1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
October 1
[edit]
- 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: deleted Graeme Bartlett (talk) 13:39, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- OR, UE Projekt (talk) 01:04, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Per WP:CSD#G7.--Rockfang (talk) 02:05, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy deleted G7 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:23, 2 October 2009 (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.
- 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: deleted Graeme Bartlett (talk) 13:40, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- OR, UE Projekt (talk) 01:06, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - per WP:CSD#G7.--Rockfang (talk) 02:08, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy deleted G7 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:24, 2 October 2009 (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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:05, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- orphaned, no target article; subject not ID'd Skier Dude (talk) 04:35, 1 October 2009 (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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:05, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- orphaned, no encyc value Skier Dude (talk) 04:53, 1 October 2009 (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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:05, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- orphaned. low quality, subject not ID'd Skier Dude (talk) 04:53, 1 October 2009 (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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:05, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Buses of Gandhinagar IMG0173A.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Jaimin Naik (notify | contribs).
- orphaned, low quality/blurred image, UE Skier Dude (talk) 04:56, 1 October 2009 (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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:05, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Cccover.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Post Falls Man (notify | contribs).
- orphaned, no target article provided, UE Skier Dude (talk) 05:07, 1 October 2009 (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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:05, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Coach2.gif (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Nepotolemus (notify | contribs).
- orphaned, no target article, UE without it Skier Dude (talk) 05:11, 1 October 2009 (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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:05, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Cooltext93679278.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Wamke4 (notify | contribs).
- OR, UE Skier Dude (talk) 05:20, 1 October 2009 (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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:05, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Rhythmmeen.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Stylegamer (notify | contribs).
- appears to be screenshot or promotional image Skier Dude (talk) 05:28, 1 October 2009 (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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:05, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- orphaned, no target article, UE w/out it Skier Dude (talk) 05:49, 1 October 2009 (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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:05, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:DSCF0649.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Ssagustsson (notify | contribs).
- orphaned, UE, no target article given Skier Dude (talk) 05:54, 1 October 2009 (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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:05, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Doodle on paint.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Yismeicha (notify | contribs).
- OR, UE Skier Dude (talk) 06:05, 1 October 2009 (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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:05, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- OR, UE Skier Dude (talk) 06:06, 1 October 2009 (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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:05, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:True Majority Dancing Man.gif (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by TrueMajority (notify | contribs).
- OR, UE Skier Dude (talk) 06:14, 1 October 2009 (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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:05, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Gasprices.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by TrueMajority (notify | contribs).
- OR, UE Skier Dude (talk) 06:15, 1 October 2009 (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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:05, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Greece Economy.gif (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Kainer211 (notify | contribs).
- OR, UE Skier Dude (talk) 06:27, 1 October 2009 (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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:05, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- OR, UE Skier Dude (talk) 06:27, 1 October 2009 (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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:05, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Happylemon.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by TaylorSwift4ever (notify | contribs).
- OR, UE Skier Dude (talk) 06:30, 1 October 2009 (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.
- 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:04, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Portland Sea Dogs Insignia.svg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Kalel2007 (notify | contribs).
- I believe that this image is redundant with File:Portland Sea Dogs.svg, and that the Portland Sea Dogs article just needs one of the two. This image is just the graphical element of File:Portland Sea Dogs.svg placed on a blue field. We don't need to see both to demonstrate what the insignia of the team is. Andrew c [talk] 15:39, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Tentative Keep It seems that a large percentage of the baseball articles denote the difference between the official team logos and also illustrate what the players actually wear (what is more common). Both serve a purpose here and both can be included since this is what they are trying to illustrate. That the two logos share components is irrelevant. They are different and should show the differences on the page. That said, it is pretty weak. — BQZip01 — talk 21:12, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- But it is the exact same logo. Only difference is one is cropped and on a blue background. We do not need to see this to understand this. Perhaps if it was a picture of the full uniform, or something that clearly conveyed additional information. When looking at the two images side by side, I don't see how it can pass WP:NFCC #3a. -Andrew c [talk] 14:44, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - in the context of File:Portland Sea Dogs.svg, this doesn't add much. PhilKnight (talk) 09:55, 12 October 2009 (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.
- 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: deleted, per the arguments of Andrew c and PhilKnight. I also note that the uploader's assertion about the second file version being freely licensed qua artwork seems to be a misunderstanding: the copyright notice on the source site [1] seems to be only saying that the site owner isn't claiming he has any rights over the copyrighted logo parts, but not that he is giving up his copyright of his own artwork parts. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:25, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Similar to the above request, this is just the non-free logo File:Utah Utes logo.png repeated in situ. I believe it fails WP:NFCC #3a as we don't need multiple images of the logo like this, and I believe it fails WP:NFCC #8 as seeing the logo on a generic red helmet does not significantly increase understanding. Additionally, I believe the fair use rationale is weak, for example the purpose of "To denote the helmet of the team". Andrew c [talk] 20:14, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
DeleteThis helmet is a copyrighted drawing from a website. Someone can easily take a picture of a Utes helmet and crop out everything else around it. Ergo, it is replaceable. — BQZip01 — talk 21:07, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]- Keep now that my concerns have been addressed. — BQZip01 — talk 23:31, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. First, the argument by Andrew c presumes that a user already knows what a football helmet looks like, which might not necessarily be so. Second, knowing what a helmet looks like vastly helps the reader. The college football articles that have achieve GA status include an image of the helmet. See Maryland Terrapins football, Oklahoma Sooners football, and Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets football. Next, the Utah Utes football team does employ a red helmet with sports logo on it, but that is not clear until one sees it. Many teams do not put their logo on their helmet. Furthermore, some helmets do have additional design, such as a stripe, which one would not know about unless one actually sees an image of the helmet. In other words, seeing the image of Utah's helmet conveys information that is best conveyed by actually seeing. Whether or not we include helmets in football team pages should not turn on whether or not the team has chosen a particular complex design in its helmet. Ute in DC (talk) 21:16, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Ute, don't take it personally, but that is a copyrighted drawing of a helmet. I'm not saying it can't be there, but that it needs to be replaced by a free image instead. My point is that it is replaceable by a free image and therefore must go. — BQZip01 — talk 21:23, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Noted. I found a free alternative that states the copyright remains with the owner of the logo so your concern has been addressed. Ute in DC (talk) 21:25, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Where did you get that information? The image is still tagged as non-free, and I don't see any updated source or licensing information?-Andrew c [talk] 14:42, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- You are confusing two issues. The artist who created the image is not claiming any copyright over the image. User:BQZip01's objection related to the artist of the first image maintaining a copyright over his rendering. The second artist, however, maintains no copyright over his rendering. The file is, however, an image of a copyrighted logo. For that, there needs to be a fair use rationale. The image is tagged as non-free because the University of Utah maintains a copyright over their logo and thus helmets with their logo. One cannot use the copyrighted image for commerical profit, but wikipedia does have a fair use right to educate the public on what a Utah Utes football helmet looks like. Ute in DC (talk) 15:34, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry if this sounds basic, but why? Why does Wikipedia have a right to educate the public on what a Utah Utes football helmet looks like by means of a non-free image? How does it significantly increase our understanding of the topic of the article? Also, could you like to the artist claiming "no copyright over his rendering"? Thanks. -Andrew c [talk] 16:15, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- First a link: http://www.mghelmets.com/. "All logos and copyrights and designs on this site are the property of the respective owners." As for your question, I think you are asking why this image falls within wikipedia's fair use policy. (If that is not what you are asking, please clarify.) The image of the uniform of a sports team, or in this case the helmet portion of the uniform, helps to identify the sports team in question. It also educates the wikipedia reader about what the uniform looks like and helps the reader visualize the subject of the article—the Utah Utes football team. A reader may not be familiar with American football, much less the Utah Utes. For all these reasons, a reader's understanding would be significantly hampered without the image.
- That quoted text says nothing about the underlying illustration. Not sure why the helmet illustration was changed, but I guess we are in agreement it is still non-free. I disagree that we need to see a non-free image of the logo on a generic red football helmet, when we already have a non-free image of the logo on this page. Fails WP:NFCC #3 in my opinion in addition to #8. It would be nice to have more opinions (the point of these deletion discussion). -Andrew c [talk] 02:00, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- First a link: http://www.mghelmets.com/. "All logos and copyrights and designs on this site are the property of the respective owners." As for your question, I think you are asking why this image falls within wikipedia's fair use policy. (If that is not what you are asking, please clarify.) The image of the uniform of a sports team, or in this case the helmet portion of the uniform, helps to identify the sports team in question. It also educates the wikipedia reader about what the uniform looks like and helps the reader visualize the subject of the article—the Utah Utes football team. A reader may not be familiar with American football, much less the Utah Utes. For all these reasons, a reader's understanding would be significantly hampered without the image.
- Sorry if this sounds basic, but why? Why does Wikipedia have a right to educate the public on what a Utah Utes football helmet looks like by means of a non-free image? How does it significantly increase our understanding of the topic of the article? Also, could you like to the artist claiming "no copyright over his rendering"? Thanks. -Andrew c [talk] 16:15, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- You are confusing two issues. The artist who created the image is not claiming any copyright over the image. User:BQZip01's objection related to the artist of the first image maintaining a copyright over his rendering. The second artist, however, maintains no copyright over his rendering. The file is, however, an image of a copyrighted logo. For that, there needs to be a fair use rationale. The image is tagged as non-free because the University of Utah maintains a copyright over their logo and thus helmets with their logo. One cannot use the copyrighted image for commerical profit, but wikipedia does have a fair use right to educate the public on what a Utah Utes football helmet looks like. Ute in DC (talk) 15:34, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Where did you get that information? The image is still tagged as non-free, and I don't see any updated source or licensing information?-Andrew c [talk] 14:42, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Noted. I found a free alternative that states the copyright remains with the owner of the logo so your concern has been addressed. Ute in DC (talk) 21:25, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - in the context of File:Utah Utes logo.png, this doesn't add much. Could a free image be created that showed a football game? This would presumably educate the Wikipedia reader about what the uniform looks like and help the reader understand the subject of the article, especially if the reader wasn't familiar with American football, much less the Utah Utes. PhilKnight (talk) 10:02, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - I agree with Ute in DC. Football teams are recognized largely by their helmets and it is an important part of the article. Almost all of the other decent articles on college football teams have at least one image of the helmet. The Oklahoma Sooners football article has three images of the helmet. UteFan16 (talk) 05:23, 15 October 2009 (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.
- 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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:05, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Agnes on and on version 2.0.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Flakes (notify | contribs).
- This file fails to meet our WP:NFCC policy. Specifically, it does not meet point eight of the policy as the file does not add significantly to readers' understanding of the article and its omission would not be detrimental to that understanding. With four screenshots provided, this file is also in excessive use of non-free content. — ξxplicit 21:37, 1 October 2009 (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.