Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 January 2

< January 1	January 3 >

January 2

File:Tainan baseball 013.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An image of Tainan Municipal Baseball Stadium. The source is dead, so the license can't be checked, and the article is already illustrated with a similar picture. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:05, 2 January 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:Tainan Court Verdict.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, no real context and therefore no apparent encyclopedic value. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:07, 2 January 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:Tainanbf4.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, low quality image of Tainan Municipal Baseball Stadium. License is dubious and would need an OTRS or a link to a website. Article is already illustrated. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:08, 2 January 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:Taurus 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 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned logo, not clear which Taurus this corresponds to, and the most obvious user of logos named Taurus, the gun manufacturer, has a different logo. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:34, 2 January 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:FOV Target on Monitor.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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Low Quality, superseded by File:FOV Target on Monitor.png, no foreseeable use. FASTILY ^{Happy 2012!!} 03:42, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Agree with nominator, it's redundant to File:FOV Target on Monitor.png with no foreseeable use. Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 22:08, 14 January 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:Thomas Merton sketch.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused amateur drawing of Thomas Merton. No real use. Fan art? An attempt at WSJ-style drawings? Possibly a recreation (read: derivative work) of an copyrighted image? GrapedApe (talk) 03:47, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader is a longtime editor who states that he is the author. Lots of good editors do the same all the time. Is there a way to protect a self-uploaded, self-authored file from this type of deletion? Unless there is, AGF has to apply. There's also no policy, as far as I know, to delete unused files. Smallbones (talk) 15:42, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's an unused doodle. What is its purpose?--GrapedApe (talk) 13:18, 5 January 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:Suzuki234.GIF

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused amateur drawing of Shunryu Suzuki. No real use. Fan art? An attempt at WSJ-style drawings? Possibly a recreation (read: derivative work) of an copyrighted image? GrapedApe (talk) 03:47, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader is a longtime editor who states that he is the author. Lots of good editors do the same all the time. Is there a way to protect a self-uploaded, self-authored file from this type of deletion? Unless there is, AGF has to apply. There's also no policy, as far as I know, to delete unused files. Smallbones (talk) 15:43, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's an unused doodle. What is its purpose?--GrapedApe (talk) 13:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy - Move to user's space, rather than simple deletion. Northamerica1000^(talk) 13:37, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I was unaware that there was such a namespace. File:User:? Where is it in Wikipedia:Namespace?--GrapedApe (talk) 02:43, 10 January 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:Suzuki21.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused amateur drawing of Shunryu Suzuki. No real use. Fan art? An attempt at WSJ-style drawings? Possibly a recreation (read: derivative work) of an copyrighted image? GrapedApe (talk) 03:47, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader is a longtime editor who states that he is the author. Lots of good editors do the same all the time. Is there a way to protect a self-uploaded, self-authored file from this type of deletion? Unless there is, AGF has to apply. There's also no policy, as far as I know, to delete unused files. Smallbones (talk) 15:44, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's an unused doodle. What is its purpose?--GrapedApe (talk) 13:19, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy - Move to user's space, rather than deletion. Northamerica1000^(talk) 13:38, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I was unaware that there was such a namespace. File:User:? Where is it in Wikipedia:Namespace?--GrapedApe (talk) 02:44, 10 January 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:Suzuki.GIF

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused amateur drawing of Shunryu Suzuki. No real use. Fan art? An attempt at WSJ-style drawings? Possibly a recreation (read: derivative work) of an copyrighted image? GrapedApe (talk) 03:47, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader is a longtime editor who states that he is the author. Lots of good editors do the same all the time. Is there a way to protect a self-uploaded, self-authored file from this type of deletion? Unless there is, AGF has to apply. There's also no policy, as far as I know, to delete unused files. Smallbones (talk) 15:43, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's a doodle. What is its purpose?--GrapedApe (talk) 15:45, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy - Move to user's space, rather than deletion. Northamerica1000^(talk) 13:38, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I was unaware that there was such a namespace. File:User:? Where is it in Wikipedia:Namespace?--GrapedApe (talk) 02:44, 10 January 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:Decision Problem.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

has been made obsolete by File:Decision Problem.svg $The Haz talk$ 04:10, 2 January 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:Unikkatil concert.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

no stated source, uploader has uploaded numerous sound clips by this artist and tagged them own work Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:27, 2 January 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:Unikkatil .GIF

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

no stated source, uploader has uploaded numerous sound clips by this artist and tagged them own work Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:27, 2 January 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:JoeWynn Prophet X.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic (Prophet X) Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:48, 2 January 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:Harmonics Pitch.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, unclear encyclopedic value, related to Different Harmonic Modes Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:58, 2 January 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:Harmonics Sound.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, unclear encyclopedic value, related to Different Harmonic Modes Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:58, 2 January 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:Curpiano.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, unclear encyclopedic value, related to Different Harmonic Modes, no stated source Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:58, 2 January 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:Circle Infinite.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, not really worth moving to commons - simple black polygon GIF Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:59, 2 January 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:Enneadecagon19.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, not really worth moving to commons - simple black polygon GIF Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:59, 2 January 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:Heptadecagon17.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, not really worth moving to commons - simple black polygon GIF Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:59, 2 January 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:Hexadecagon16.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, not really worth moving to commons - simple black polygon GIF Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:00, 2 January 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:Pentadecagon15.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, not really worth moving to commons - simple black polygon GIF Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:00, 2 January 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:Triskaidecagon13.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, not really worth moving to commons - simple black polygon GIF Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:00, 2 January 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:Dodecagon12.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, not really worth moving to commons - simple black polygon GIF Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:00, 2 January 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:Hendecagon11.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, not really worth moving to commons - simple black polygon GIF Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:00, 2 January 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:Digon2.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, not really worth moving to commons - simple black polygon GIF Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:00, 2 January 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:Decagon10.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, not really worth moving to commons - simple black polygon GIF Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:01, 2 January 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:Enneagon9.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, not really worth moving to commons - simple black polygon GIF Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:01, 2 January 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:Octagon8.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, not really worth moving to commons - simple black polygon GIF Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:01, 2 January 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:Heptagon7.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, not really worth moving to commons - simple black polygon GIF Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:01, 2 January 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:Hexagon6.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, not really worth moving to commons - simple black polygon GIF Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:01, 2 January 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:Pentagon5.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, not really worth moving to commons - simple black polygon GIF Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:01, 2 January 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:Trigon.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, not really worth moving to commons - simple black polygon GIF Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:01, 2 January 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:AnimatedTyping by Scanning.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Contains copyrighted Microsoft windows elements. Needs FUR Sreejith K (talk) 05:51, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I constructed the image from File:Typing_by_Scanning.jpg (and to replace it) - Could someone give me a hand in how I update the image description so it matches the orginal? Failedwizard (talk) 20:34, 4 January 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:Audimated 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 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image might be little complicated than what is required for {{PD-textlogo}} Sreejith K (talk) 06:17, 2 January 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:South Alabama Football.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute the fair use of the helmets (as distinct from the logo) part of this image, the source is given as http://nationalchamps.net/Helmet_Project/index.htm AND http://nationalchamps.net/Helmet_Project/, neither of which release the helmet part for free use.
This helmet image can be replaced by a free ones taken at any game with a FUR made for the part of the image that is the logo. Mt king ^(edits) 09:12, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Image and its use qualify under Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria. No free equivalent. The football helmet is important to help identify the team in line with the intended branding.--GrapedApe (talk) 15:37, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have a read of Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 December 11#File:LSU Helmet.png the helmet element (not the logo) part image IS replaceable.Mt king ^(edits) 19:32, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, as the helmet (not the logo) is a copyvio. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 04:10, 5 January 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:North Texas.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute the fair use of this helmet picture, the logo displayed is not copyrightable as it contains only letters so there is no need to use a copyright image (from http://www.mghelmets.com) when a free one can be obtained at any game. Mt king ^(edits) 09:14, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Image and its use qualify under Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria. No free equivalent. The football helmet is important to help identify the team in line with the intended branding.--GrapedApe (talk) 15:37, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

the logo is not copyrightable and this is replaceable (read Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 December 11#File:LSU Helmet.png).Mt king ^(edits) 19:33, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per this, as the helmet (not the logo) is a copyvio. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 04:13, 5 January 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:Latechfootballhelmet.gif

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

clear copyvio from http://www.nationalchamps.net/Helmet_Project/, no FUR can be made for it's use it is replaceable with a free one taken at any game. Mt king ^(edits) 09:17, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Fair use rationale added. Image and its use qualify under Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria. No free equivalent. The football helmet is important to help identify the team in line with the intended branding.--GrapedApe (talk) 15:36, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have a read of Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 December 11#File:LSU Helmet.png the helmet element (not the logo) part image IS replaceable.Mt king ^(edits) 19:35, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This same basic design has been used by Louisiana Tech since 1968; therefore, this image is an integral part of the program's identity and should be displayed on Wikipedia. -AllisonFoley (talk) 20:01, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Then take a photo of a helmet and release it with a free licence and use that rather than this copyright one. Mt king ^(edits) 20:08, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Even if the logo itself is defensible, and I think it is, there's no way that this specific rendering of it onto a helmet is. Should be deleted. 74.74.150.139 (talk) 03:38, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per this, as the helmet is a copyvio. The logo is not the problem. Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 04:14, 5 January 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:Longhorn RSoD.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I do not believe that this software screenshot qualifies for PD-ineligible, it is not simple text and geometric objects in the spirit of PD-textlogo, it's a full composition. If it's decided to be kept, it needs a FUR, but in the way it's used, I don't think it's sufficiently different from the other RSoD on the page to warrant the inclusion of both. (Placed up for deletion at Commons as well). Sven Manguard Wha? 14:31, 2 January 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:Weeping statue.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

CC-BY-2.0 copyright status is unverifiable. Image was uploaded 4 years ago from flickr with a claim of free license, but that free license was never confirmed. That flickr user is now gone, meaning that we have no way to verify the copyright status of this image. Contested NSD. If this were on Commons, it would be long gone. GrapedApe (talk) 15:42, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader is a longtime editor who states that he checked the copyright status. AGF should apply. I'm concerned that a minor change in rules or in the usual method of enforcement of the rules (which ultimately could affect ANY upload) is being used to delete a file that was uploaded in accordance with the rules then in effect. The file has gone unchallenged for 4.5 years, plenty of time to sort out any real problem. Smallbones (talk) 16:03, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing new about requiring some kind of confirmation/verification of a hosted image's copyright status. Unfortunately, en.wiki doesn't have a flickrreview template, like the commons template.--GrapedApe (talk) 03:26, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The wayback machine has archives of two of this Flickr user's photo pages: [1] and [2]. The first is CC-BY-NC-2.0 and the second CC-BY-ND-2.0, which are both unusable by us. That doesn't prove anything about this image, of course, but it sure implies it. 74.74.150.139 (talk) 03:34, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Luckily this image is easily replacable (1, 2, 3). ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 03:53, 4 January 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:Technosis genorate.ogg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

replaced by Scott_brown_systematic.ogg Revolt (talk) 15:58, 2 January 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:Chavezcoup.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. Neither the image's description page, nor its use in 1992 Venezuelan coup d'état attempts, nor any of the keep votes here make the case that this is a historically important image, as opposed to merely being an image of a historic event. --Carnildo (talk) 00:54, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Extended explanation, in response to the comments on my talk page.

After discarding User:jbmurray's vote as irrelevant and ignoring the bickering about procedural matters, the debate comes down to the question of "is this a historically significant image", in the context of non-free content criteria #8, contextual significance. My understanding of "a historically significant image" is that one should be able to write about the creation, context, and impact of the image itself, in the manner of Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima, The Blue Marble, or Guerrillero Heroico.

Of the "keep" voters, Dreadstar, Hobit, and Thincat make unbacked assertions that it's historic, while 74.74.150.139's assertion that it "adds to the reader's understanding of this historic event" barely touches on context, and ignores creation and impact entirely. This adds up to a very weak case for keeping the image.

Of the "delete" voters, Mtking asserts that it fails WP:NFCC#8 (contextual significance) without explanation, but the non-free content policy places the burden of proof on editors who want the image kept, and the image description page makes no explanation of why this image is significant in the context of 1992 Venezuelan coup d'état attempts, while 74.74.150.139 claims that it adds to the reader's understanding of it, without explaining how it does so.

Most significantly, User:Armbrust raises the point that the article does not contain sourced critical commentary about the image (the "creation, context, and impact" factors). Without this commentary, there is no evidence that this is a historic image, and since the burden of proof for non-free images lies on those who wish to keep them, I have chosen to delete the image. --Carnildo (talk) 05:42, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary non-free decorative image showing two important men meeting, used just to make the point that they once met, and purportedly to show how one of the guys likes to dress (although we have better free images to do this job). No relevant information is uniquely conveyed by this picture. damiens.rf 20:19, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. As amply demonstrated at the file's previous two FFDs (1, 2) and DRVs (1, 2), which nominator is well aware of and deliberately omits to mention, this is an irreplaceable historic photograph that significantly adds to the reader's understanding of this historic event. There is absolutely no consensus that this fails WP:NFCC#8, and while consensus might change, it won't over a period of weeks. Nominator's repeated renomination of this image with similar belittling rationales while twice deliberately mistating the image's previous deletion history cannot be described as anything but tendentious, and I respectfully suggest he stop beating the poor dead horse. 74.74.150.139 (talk) 21:45, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Despite your beautiful words, nothing has been "amply demonstrated" at all. This file is surviving deletions based on manipulations of technicalities on the polices regarding closing discussions. --damiens.rf 16:16, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - This file is surviving deletion because there is no consensus to delete it, and your repeated attempts to get a different answer through attritition are contemptible. The only person manipulating process here is you. 74.74.150.139 (talk) 01:45, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails to meet WP:NFCC#8 and unless it can be shown that consensus is that it does meet that then it should be deleted i.e. no consensus = delete in this case as the policy page is clear non-free content "may be used on the English Wikipedia only where all 10 of the following criteria are met." Mtking^(edits) 02:20, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Your reading of policy is demonstrably false. If it's deleted without consensus again it'll be demonstrated on DRV a third time. 74.74.150.139 (talk) 03:21, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is a fundamentally dishonest nomination in every way. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 19:35, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree with Mtking, picture fails WP:NFCC#8. The picture doesn't enhance the readers understanding of the topic and article doesn't contain sourced critical commentary about it. Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 10:50, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is presently no consensus that the file fails the WP:NFCC#8 criterion or any of the other criteria. Hence to delete the file would be contrary to policy. Thincat (talk) 11:33, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Are you really voting "keep - no consensus to delete"? This is a self-referential fallacious logic. --damiens.rf 16:14, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - My reference is to WP:Deletion review/Log/2011 December 11, not to the present discussion. Obviously I do not know what the result of this AFD discussion is going to be. The DRV was closed very recently, well-attended by highly experienced editors, coherently argued, and closed to overturn the AFD to "no consensus". I consider the matter was well discussed on all sides (I acknowledged this at the DRV) and the DRV close was appropriate. That remains my opinion and that is why I think the file should be kept. Thincat (talk) 17:57, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually there is no consensus that the file meets the WP:NFCC#8 criterion hence to use the file would be contrary to policy. Mtking^(edits) 19:58, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Excent in cases of objective fact, which by any reasonable interpretation WP:NFCC#8 is not, we don't delete unless there's a consensus to do so. That's what policy has been for more than a decade now, ever since the first revision of Wikipedia:Deletion policy. That's why we have these discussions in the first place, not as a twisted forum for users to vent before an administrator goes ahead and imposes his own subjective interpretation. 74.74.150.139 (talk) 01:45, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, the image is clearly historically important, and per DGG's comments in the second DRV that overturned the second deletion. Considering the history of these deletion requests, this latest IfD is looking more like disruption than anything else at this point. Dreadstar ☥ 00:54, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep appears to be historically important. Hobit (talk) 17:51, 11 January 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:Ros-21.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. No forseen use. Uploader #2 requested deletion here http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:ZooFari&oldid=64723250#Could_you_check_your_uploads_on_en-wiki? MGA73 (talk) 21:39, 2 January 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:Comet-pond.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. No forseen use. Uploader #2 requested deletion here http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:ZooFari&oldid=64723250#Could_you_check_your_uploads_on_en-wiki? MGA73 (talk) 21:41, 2 January 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:P5240035.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned userphoto. Kelly ^hi! 22:13, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy - to the person's user space. Northamerica1000^(talk) 13:44, 8 January 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.