Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 September 13

< September 12	September 14 >

September 13

File:Picture 77.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 Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:06, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unused image. No context for encyclopedic use. —Bkell (talk) 00:18, 13 September 2010 (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:Picture 202.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unused photos of some Perrier bottles uploaded by a now-blocked user. If someone thinks these photos should be saved, they should be moved to the Commons (the first under a better file name). —Bkell (talk) 00:23, 13 September 2010 (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:Ashley-kirilow.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 ⚡ 08:42, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BLP concerns, we have no article on this low-profile woman, and the file is totally unnecessary and fails the NFCC in the articles it was inserted in. Courcelles 00:25, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

- Keep -- I question whether anyone who has received coverage in newspapers and news broadcasts around the world should be characterized as a "low-profile woman". BLP was created, in part, to protect private individuals, who received passing notice in the news, through no effort on their own. It seems to me BLP was not designed to protect the privacy of individuals who have already chosen to sacrifice their privacy. Kirilow did her best to get her story circulated as widely as possible.
  - She sought as much publicity as possible when she was trying to raise money;
  - She appeared at multiple public fundraising events in 2009, that raised tens of thousancds of dollars;
  - And, prior to surrendering herself to the Police she contacted the press, to get a new version of her story out there.

So Kirilow has chosen to sacrifice her privacy, and invoking the clauses of BLP designed to protect the privacy on non-public individuals seems to me to be highly inappropriate.

As to the image being "totally unnecessary" -- I remind you of the old saying "a picture is worth a thousand words". In this particular instance I suggest the before and after images, show her cancer charade in a manner that couldn't be done in a thousand words, or a million. Geo Swan (talk) 00:47, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Kirilow is low-profile to the point that her article didn't survive AFD. How does "Kirilow shaved her head" not get the same point across to the point of requiring non-free content? Especially on the articles where it is being used- a list, where NFC is almost never justifiable, and a charity who was taken in by her? She's still alive, so a free photo could be created, or sourced from these events you mention. It fails several points of the NFC requirements. Courcelles 01:21, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have concerns over that {{afd}}, which I am discussing with the closing administrator, and I am likely to request a DRV on it. Geo Swan (talk) 21:50, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You write that a free image could be created of her bald pate and plucked eyelashes. That is completely false, since she has let her hair grow back in, and it is, from the press accounts, long enough to be in a short pony tail. And, while she is technically at large, she was released into the custody of the John Howard Society. So, she is closely supervised. There was not even a photo-op, after she was granted bail, because her lawyer and the John Howard Society were granted the privilege of sneaking her out through a back exit, due to the death threats she has received. I don't know where you live, but death threats are extremely rare up here. Geo Swan (talk) 21:50, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You write, "How does 'Kirilow shaved her head' not get the same point across..." Kirilow did not just shave her head. Kirilow lost weight, shaved her head, waxed her eyebrows, plucked her eyelashes, and published these photos in order to raise further funds. I will trust that you can honestly look at the photo, and think that the phrase "Kirilow shaved her head" gets this point across. Please forgive me for expressing my honest bewilderment at your assertion. Geo Swan (talk) 21:58, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WRT your BLP concern -- were you planning to explain your BLP concerns further? Or do you accept that someone who spent a year doing their best to have a public profile, in order to raise funds, is not a private person who should be protected by the provisions of BLP intended to protect private persons who accidentally find themselves subjected to public scrutiny? Geo Swan (talk) 21:58, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - BLP concerns. If we had a biography on this individual, then perhaps it would be justified, but isn't necessary at the moment. PhilKnight (talk) 21:13, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The biography for Kirilow was deleted in August, and the other pages where the image is used and rationales are provided do not require a non-free photo of Kirilow to aid in the reader's understanding. SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:59, 22 September 2010 (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:Picture 1250.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, rather low-quality photograph of the Ohio River, without information such as reasons this particular spot on the river is interesting or notable or even what part of the river this is. It seems unlikely there is enough context here to make effective use of this photo. —Bkell (talk) 00:37, 13 September 2010 (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:Picture 212.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unused photo with no context for encyclopedic use. —Bkell (talk) 00:59, 13 September 2010 (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:Picture 565.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unused photo with no context for encyclopedic use. —Bkell (talk) 01:03, 13 September 2010 (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:Picture 1223.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unused photo with no context for encyclopedic use. —Bkell (talk) 01:04, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is a view of downtown Cleveland from the Innerbelt Bridge. PNC Center is the white building on the left, the AT&T Huron Road Building is the one with the green top, and the toothbrush lights in the middle of the photo are part of Progressive Field. - Eureka Lott 14:17, 13 September 2010 (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:Jinn in another demension.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Useless image Eeekster (talk) 03:59, 13 September 2010 (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:Goodtimeso1.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OR, UE Skier Dude (talk 04:48, 13 September 2010 (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:N-matthias3.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OR personal image; no encyc use Skier Dude (talk 04:53, 13 September 2010 (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:N1063320080 30001734 2741.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OR personal photo - no encyc use Skier Dude (talk 04:55, 13 September 2010 (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:N14900005 30036585 1764.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OR; UE Skier Dude (talk 04:56, 13 September 2010 (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:N1bluenilr.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OR; subject not ID'd Skier Dude (talk 04:57, 13 September 2010 (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:N2251338621 30645.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OR; apparently fake logo Skier Dude (talk 04:57, 13 September 2010 (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:Dermott brereton.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DVD cover used on subject's article with no critical commentary Skier Dude (talk 05:24, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It is discussed in detail in the article. Read the section on the 1989 grand final - this is a photo of him just after he suffered broken ribs. It is an iconic, non-replacable photo. The DVD is coverage of that game and others from that decade.The-Pope (talk) 01:15, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If the DVD cover is being used to illustrate the article on the person whose photograph is on the cover, the use is probably unacceptable, in accordance with WP:NFC#UUI #9. —Bkell (talk) 15:30, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What does "used to illustrate the article on the person" mean? It's gibberish. Speak plain English and we might be able to understand the rules. The game is notable. The DVD is of the game. The person on the cover is in a iconic pose from the game, and it is described in the article. Are you saying that if we can find a similar/same photo, but not from a DVD cover, then it could be used under free use, but a photo on a DVD cover can't be? "However, if the cover itself is the subject of sourced discussion in the article, it may be appropriate if placed inline next to the commentary." So if the photo depicted on the cover, but not the fact it was on the cover, was discussed, that isn't enough. The-Pope (talk) 17:13, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not gibberish (this DVD cover is being used to illustrate the article Dermott Brereton, which is the article on the person Dermott Hugh Brereton, who is the person whose photograph is on the cover—as opposed to the DVD cover being used to illustrate the article on the DVD), but let me rephrase: If the only purpose of the DVD cover in the Dermott Brereton article is to show a picture of Dermott Brereton, then we shouldn't use it. If the DVD cover is used because the DVD cover itself is discussed, then it's possibly okay to use.

I say "possibly" because, in addition to that, the use of the image must satisfy all of the criteria listed at WP:NFCC. In this case WP:NFCC#8 is going to be the difficult one to justify. You're going to have to explain how the inclusion of the DVD cover in the Dermott Brereton article "significantly increase[s] readers' understanding" of Dermott Brereton (the topic of the article) and how its omission would "be detrimental to that understanding." Exactly what significant understanding about Mr. Brereton do readers of the article get from this DVD cover that they couldn't get if the cover were removed? —Bkell (talk) 05:43, 15 September 2010 (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:Derroll Adams.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

cropped image from CD cover used on artist's article infobox - no critical commentary Skier Dude (talk 05:25, 13 September 2010 (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:Desertislanddec.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. As point nine of WP:NFC#UUI states, book covers used in the biography of the author requires critical sourced commentary on the book cover itself, not the book. — ξ ^xplicit 00:40, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

book cover used on author's article with no critical commentary thereof Skier Dude (talk 05:30, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: This now has critical commentary. The importance of this book is that it shows how Smith was so hot as the bestselling humorist of WWII that he edited a 1945 book featuring pieces by many of the previous well-known humorists. As noted, this book is referenced in various histories of the Manhattan Project. Pepso2 (talk) 13:03, 19 September 2010 (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:Lowman.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. As point nine of WP:NFC#UUI states, book covers used in the biography of the author requires critical sourced commentary on the book cover itself, not the book. — ξ ^xplicit 00:40, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

book cover used on author's article with no critical commentary thereof Skier Dude (talk 05:30, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: There is critical commentary. Note the entire paragraph that begins: "He found fame when his humor book Low Man on a Totem Pole (1941) became a bestseller during WWII, popular not only on the homefront but also read on troop trains and at military camps." It's important to show this book because it was the book everyone read during WWII, eventually selling over a million copies. Although H. Allen Smith is now something of a forgotten writer, his three books of the early 1940s kept him on the bestseller list for 100 weeks, and at the end of the war, all three were reprinted in a single volume. Pepso2 (talk) 10:31, 19 September 2010 (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:Emilydavies.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

book cover used on subject's article with no critical commentary (no FuR) Skier Dude (talk 05:52, 13 September 2010 (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:Picture 1532.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unused photo. Based on the road signs, this is probably somewhere in Scott County, Kentucky, but without more information I don't think we have enough context to make effective use of this image. —Bkell (talk) 07:29, 13 September 2010 (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:Picture 1096.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unused photo of Grawemeyer Hall at the University of Louisville. Seems to have been superseded by File:Grawhallul.jpg, which is a better photo. (If anyone believes this image should be kept, it should be moved to the Commons under a better file name.) —Bkell (talk) 09:19, 13 September 2010 (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:VitoRizzuto.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free image of a living person, fails WP:NFCC#1. Jmundo (talk) 20:35, 13 September 2010 (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:A51 Logo.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

superseded by File:A51 Logo.svg Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:20, 13 September 2010 (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.