Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 June 10

< June 9	June 11 >

June 10

File:Word 2007 Page zoom.png

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 F5 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe that this meets NFCC #8, and irregardless of that it can be replaced with something from OpenOffice or another free software. Sven Manguard Wha? 01:39, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've just orphaned this in favor of File:LibreOffice zoom bar.png. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:09, 10 June 2012 (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:IE 8 page zoom.png

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that this meets NFCC #8, it really isn't needed for the understanding of IE7 Sven Manguard Wha? 01:41, 10 June 2012 (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:Caldecott Fox 1883 2 equalize.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 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not identical but there is a Commons version at File:Caldecott Fox 1883 2.png that is almost identical. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:31, 10 June 2012 (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:SDO Logo.pdf

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned to the (poorly named) File:Pages from 417176main SDO Guide CMR.png on Commons. We really shouldn't have .pdf images for article use anyways. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:53, 10 June 2012 (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:Proposed flag of MA.PNG

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A flag created by a user, no actual sourcing provided to say it was genuinely proposed. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 03:16, 10 June 2012 (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:Scottish Royal Crest.PNG

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused image, can be replaced by a vector version. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 03:24, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Quality leaves much to be desired. Delete per nom. Sven Manguard Wha? 03:48, 10 June 2012 (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:Median and Average Sales Prices of New Homes Sold in United States Monthly from 1999-2009.pdf

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant to File:Median and Average Sales Prices of New Homes Sold in United States Monthly from 1999-2009.png, we tend to avoid using .pdf files in articles. Sven Manguard Wha? 03:39, 10 June 2012 (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:Correctional Populations in the United States 1980-2008.pdf

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PDF version of File:Correctional Populations in the United States 1980-2008.png, we can't really use PDFs in the article space and with the .png there's no need for this. Sven Manguard Wha? 03:57, 10 June 2012 (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:Unidentified picture.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 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unidentified; overwritten by uploader within a minute of upload[1] tells me it was uploaded in error. Magog the Ogre (talk) 06:18, 10 June 2012 (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:Robin, Much and Allan.jpg.png

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free TV episode screenshot, used in infobox. Evidently random, generic shot, not the object of commentary, not needed for understanding the article, purely decorative use. Revealingly inadequate FUR: "It is a good image". Obvious NFCC#8 failure Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:36, 10 June 2012 (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:ELJamesAuthorPhoto.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 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:NFC#UUI. The image is of an alive person, just because no free image is available, does not mean the image can be used. Fixer23 (talk) 08:52, 10 June 2012 (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:Suckit.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 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The image itself is not the subject of sourced commentary in the article and is simply used for cosmetic purpose. Fixer23 (talk) 08:54, 10 June 2012 (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:Roman Empire in 50 BC.svg

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused file. It looks broken. MGA73 (talk) 19:52, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, I can't imagine how we could productively use an SVG that's all whitespace except for a few random names. Nyttend (talk) 00:45, 11 June 2012 (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:The Little Mermaid en.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 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pre-1923 statue so the statue is in the public domain in the United States (but not in Denmark). However, there doesn't seem to be any licence from the photographer. Replaceable since the statue is free in the United States. Stefan2 (talk) 20:53, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The image cannot be uploaded to Commons because of its copyright status in Denmark. Copyright laws differ significantly in Denmark and since the status is Danish, these laws apply. Several images like it have been deleted for this reason, most recently just two months ago. There is no free alternative. -- -- Peter ^{Talk page} 21:34, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Freedom of Panorama in Denmark only applies to buildings, not to statues. So, a 3D work of art can only be hosted on Commons if the artist died more than 70 years ago. But this is not possible since the architect Edward Eriksen only died in 1959. So, the image of the stautue can only be placed on Commons in 2030--on the 71st year after the artist died. I hope this helps. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 22:06, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the statue is copyrighted in Denmark and can't be uploaded to Commons. However, the United States has a completely different copyright term. In the United States, a Danish statue is in the public domain if either the statue was installed before 1923, or the sculptor died before 1926. Den lille Havfrue was installed in 1913, so the statue is in the public domain in the United States. If you look at Den lille Havfrue#Copyright issues, you might notice that it says that Artists Rights Society sued a United States municipality for infringing the copyright of the statue, but it also says that "The copyright claim was later reported dropped." Haven't you wondered why the claim was dropped? Simple: the statue is in the public domain in the United States, so the claim was invalid. For this purpose, there is a template called {{PD-US-1923-abroad|2030}} which can be used. However, it needs to be combined with a licence for the photographer's contribution, and there is currently no such licence indicated. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:34, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see, thanks. Could the {{PD-US-1923-abroad|2030}} be used for an image from flickr, with the appropriate license? -- Peter ^{Talk page} 23:02, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, as long as the Flickr image is available under a free licence. Such an image would need to have both {{PD-US-1923-abroad|2030}} (for the statue) and {{cc-by-2.0}}/{{cc-by-sa-2.0}} (for the photo). --Stefan2 (talk) 12:01, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Because the image itself has not been released under a free license, the image itself is replaceable, and because the subject is not under copyright in the USA, the replacement image can be released under a free license. A fair use rationale would be appropriate if we were bound by Danish copyright law here, as any replacement image would also be necessarily nonfree, but because US law makes it PD, the situation doesn't apply. Of course, if the photographer were to release the image under a free license, all the deletion reasoning would collapse. Is the uploader the photographer? Nyttend (talk) 00:44, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Flickr has several pictures with a free license. For example http://www.flickr.com/photos/xuanxu/4435567587/in/set-72157623502399387/ --MGA73 (talk) 11:32, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll upload a new image using the two templates above. I agree that this image should be deleted. -- Peter ^{Talk page} 21:13, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Stefan2 is right and I was wrong. --Leoboudv (talk) 23:07, 11 June 2012 (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:Nicki Minaj - Marilyn Monroe.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 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fanmade Statυs (talk) 21:04, 10 June 2012 (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:Nicki Minaj - Va Va Voom.png

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cover has been going around for a while, but there has been no confirmation it is real. Statυs (talk) 21:06, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It's just four words on a plain background, so this should be marked as PD-ineligible. Of course that's irrelevant to whether it's useful, but copyright isn't by itself an issue here. Nyttend (talk) 00:56, 11 June 2012 (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:Angelaraymond1992.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 by Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:07, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pulled from an unattributed gallery of images of the actress on a fansite. No indication that this is an image of the actress playing the character in the article it illustrates. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 21:43, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Note that there are several different deleted images in the history. Would you like them to be restored, in case one or more is actually an image of the actress playing the character? Nyttend (talk) 00:45, 11 June 2012 (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:Gestcrate01.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: Wrong forum: FFD is a place for applying policy, not for changing it. To attempt to deprecate the {{Keep Local}} template, go to WP:VP/P. Nyttend (talk) 00:50, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While the barbaric practice shown in the image is a good reason to publish it farand wide keeping a local copy of the image on Wikipedia is not necessary. The uploader and frequent editor of the image page appears to be pushing the boundaries between creating an encyclopaedia and animal rights advocacy. As a supporter of green politics I am also in favour of animal rights but I try and temper my personal stance for the good of The Project! -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 22:39, 10 June 2012 (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.