Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 December 10

< December 9	December 11 >

December 10

File:Park Geun-hye campaign poster.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 ⚡ 02:01, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A "compromised" poster as the texts are alterted. Compare: http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2012/11/26/61/0301000000AEN20121126009700315F.HTML Puzzlet Chung (talk) 02:19, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:49, 10 December 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:Aliya in Summer 2008.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 ⚡ 02:01, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused personal photo. Cloudbound (talk) 02:24, 10 December 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:Almanturk.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 ⚡ 02:01, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Little foreseeable use. Cloudbound (talk) 02:28, 10 December 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:Almonte town hall.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 ⚡ 02:01, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused low resolution photo. Cloudbound (talk) 02:30, 10 December 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:6black.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 ⚡ 02:01, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Little foreseeable use. Cloudbound (talk) 02:38, 10 December 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:69th Infantry.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 as F8 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Superceded in use by File:69th INF REG COA.gif. Cloudbound (talk) 02:41, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Move to commons clearly a different image, missing the ship -- 70.24.247.127 (talk) 06:53, 12 December 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:63building.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 as F8 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. No foreseeable use as the subject of the photo is not the building. Other photos already do the job. Cloudbound (talk) 02:44, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the subject of the photo is the building and the person posing with it. -- 70.24.247.127 (talk) 06:55, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Move to commons different view of the building -- 70.24.247.127 (talk) 06:55, 12 December 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:Jenni Rivera and crew before the crash.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 ⚡ 02:01, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is an Instagram photo which has reasons given for NFCC that are not strong enough, mainly because the uploader didn't want to say "I wanted this in the article because it will satisfy readers' morbid fascinations because the plane this was taken in crashed 15 minutes later." Moving down the requirements list, the picture quality is terrible, and there is already a better picture available for identification of the subject in the info box, so there is no "contextual basis" here (per NFCC 8). This is not replaceable, apparently because it is an "historic photo that will be used for identification of the subject"...except there's a better photo already in the article (fails NFCC 1). Minimal use - "used justifiably" is not an answer to this, and I would posit that it does NOT convey significant information as required (fails NFCC 3). We have no idea if NFCC 2 is met - the photographer died in the crash of the plane this photo was taken in, and I do not believe that the assertion for NFCC 2 can be made here by a third party. MSJapan (talk) 18:17, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I did not uploaded it to "satisfy readers' morbid fascinations because the plane this was taken in crashed 15 minutes later", so be careful to what you say. It is a historical depiction of her, that holds a great encyclopedic content as the last image available of her. The accident was tragic, and this serves to illustrate the context, and I'm sure thata replacement doesn't exist. "The picture quality is terrible", obviously, it was a picture taken with a phone, what do you expect? The pictures on her infobox cannot convey the same context that this picture does, in my opinion. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 18:25, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment As an Elvis fan I do not object to the last picture of him taken alive (going to the dentist I seem to recall); but would not want to see, and avoid wherever possible, photos of his dead body: I feel the same applies here. Bashereyre (talk) 19:02, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you Bashereyre. This is not a picture of her dead body but picture of her, smiling to the camera, inside the plane along with her friends. It is the last picture taken of her alive, not dead. I would never support or upload a picture of ther dead body by any means. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 19:28, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I agree with the nom that it fails NFCC. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:50, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment is there an article on the plane crash itself? Then the image could be used to illustrate the passengers while on the plane -- 70.24.247.127 (talk) 06:57, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The only value this image has is a symbolic one (knowing it was taken minutes before the crash), but there is no concrete information value. This image tells us nothing about the crash, and it tells us nothing about the persons involved that we couldn't understand from a textual description alone ("they were happy and joking around, making silly faces at a camera"). The symbolism of it being the last photograph before their death may be powerful, but that is of no relevance under NFCC#8 – what NFCC#8 deals with is concrete aid to understanding article content, and that can only work through concrete, factual information conveyed through the image. That said, the image also has blatantly false FUR and is currently liable to speedy deletion for that reason alone. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:58, 14 December 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:1894 Los Angeles High School football team.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 ⚡ 02:01, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Superceded in use by File:1894-LAHS-footballteam.jpg. Cloudbound (talk) 22:51, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy F1 applies (I think, see comment), but certainly Delete. This file wasn't superseded; the file with the hyphen (here at FfD) is three years newer than the one that is actually in use. Thus, I think you can F1 it as a dupe. MSJapan (talk) 00:10, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both File:1894 Los Angeles High School football team.jpg and File:1894-LAHS-footballteam.jpg, since I have now uploaded a higher-resolution version on Commons at File:1894 Los Angeles High School Football team.jpg. Chick Bowen 03:23, 13 December 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:2b-Bin.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 ⚡ 02:01, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. No foreseeable use. Cloudbound (talk) 23:07, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - we don't have an article on whatever it is that this relates to, so there's absolutely no context for the photo, and no need to retain it. MSJapan (talk) 00:06, 11 December 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.