Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 March 18

< Wikipedia:Files for deletion
< March 17 March 19 >

March 18

edit

South.JPG

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:South.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by OregonD00d (notify | contribs).
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.

StateOfTheUnion_S1.jpg

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 14:14, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:StateOfTheUnion_S1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Maddyfan (notify | contribs).
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.

S.Venkateswaran.jpg

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:S.Venkateswaran.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Vettyarvind (notify | contribs).
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.

Discrimination against the shia.jpg

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) An image with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 11:06, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Discrimination against the shia.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Zereshk (notify | contribs).
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.

Esperanto Wikipedia advert for Pasporta Servo.bmp

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Wizardman (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:06, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Esperanto Wikipedia advert for Pasporta Servo.bmp (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Chuck SMITH (notify | contribs).
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.

Chris champion 23.jpg

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Andrew c (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:03, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chris champion 23.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Jlp37160 (notify | contribs).
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.

SRENWHITE.jpg

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Andrew c (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:03, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:SRENWHITE.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Bizmans3 (notify | contribs).
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.

2001_pedro_nunes_03.jpg

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:2001_pedro_nunes_03.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Premkudva (notify | contribs).
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.

Spykerstamp.jpg

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Spykerstamp.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Sonett72 (notify | contribs).
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.

Hkstampoffenvsmall.jpg

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hkstampoffenvsmall.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Synergyplease (notify | contribs).
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.

Evaristo_Carazo.JPG

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Evaristo_Carazo.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Jamespeterka (notify | contribs).
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.

Upscaled geologicaltimescale.jpg

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Upscaled geologicaltimescale.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Vector Potential (notify | contribs).
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.

US UTM Zones.png

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:US UTM Zones.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by 718 Bot (notify | contribs).
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.

Rockland County Route 64.jpg

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as G7 by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rockland County Route 64.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Airtuna08 (notify | contribs).
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.

Precordial Leads.jpg

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) An image with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 11:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Precordial Leads.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by MoodyGroove (notify | contribs).
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.

Phosphine structure.gif

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as G7 by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Phosphine structure.gif (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Walkerma (notify | contribs).
OK to delete this - but this was superseded by a really nice image File:Phosphine.png, I can't find any such svg file. Often in chemistry we prefer png to svg, so this is not unusual. Walkerma (talk) 02:39, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Nj seal2.jpg

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nj seal2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Larsinio (notify | contribs).
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.

Nationalguard bureau seal n6425.gif

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nationalguard bureau seal n6425.gif (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by MAS117 (notify | contribs).
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.

Mostel HUAC.jpg

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mostel HUAC.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Ron g (notify | contribs).
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.

Lille3.jpg

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lille3.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Hardouin (notify | contribs).
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.

Szeregowy.jpg

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Szeregowy.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Emax (notify | contribs).
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.

06102007579.jpg

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:06102007579.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Chakravarthy24x7 (notify | contribs).
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.

Asperger-Vienna-clinic.jpeg

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: delete. Fails WP:NFCC #8. There is nothing about this image that significantly increases the readers' understanding of either article the image is used in. The decision to keep or delete an image from Wikipedia is decided at this forum. If the image is kept, then the decision to use the image in an article or not can be decided on the article talk page.

File:Asperger-Vienna-clinic.jpeg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Eubulides (notify | contribs).
  • Image added to autism immediately after the old one was deleted (see Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2009_March_11#Asperger_kl2.jpg). Of course, this one is completely different, as now, instead of a non-free image of Asperger, we have a non-free image of Asperger, with a child. The image illustrates nothing in particular, does not aid the reader in any tangible way and is here purely for decoration. J Milburn (talk) 20:49, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This topic has been discussed thoroughly at Talk:Autism #Asperger image. At current count, four editors (myself, User:Dbrodbeck, User:Kenosis, and an anonymous third opinion) all agree that the image should be kept, and only User:J Milburn has disagreed. The consensus on the talk page should be respected. The image's use is amply justified, as it is a historical photo of one of the two pioneering giants of autism at work, doing the psychological testing that his research was based on back in the 1930s. No free image is known for this topic, nor can a free image be created. Eubulides (talk) 22:19, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • No, the consensus of policy (which has been thoroughly ignored) and the consensus of the previous IfD (which clearly applies) should be respected. Very little reference has been made to policy- the anonymous user clearly does not actually understand the issue here, as no reference was made to the non-free-ness of the image. You have clearly shown that you are not happy with the current consensus of non-free image use with regards to this article, as you supported the retention of the previous image, which was a violation of policy. Thankfully, Wikipedia does not work by means of a head-count- if you actually want to retain this image, you're going to have to provide some clear reasons for why this image is needed- OK, it shows Asperger doing research, and OK, that can't be replaced, but why does that need to be illustrated? J Milburn (talk) 22:27, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • No policy is being ignored here. There is no "previous IfD" for this image; the previous IfD was about a strikingly different image. Reasons for keeping this image are described on the image page; clearly you disagree with these reasons but the consensus in Talk:Autism #Asperger image was strongly to keep the image. Eubulides (talk) 22:38, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The non-free content criteria is a policy, and anyone even close to familiar with it can see that this is abuse. I find it a little bit too much of a coincidence that this image was added the same day the previous image was removed- it seems fairly clear to me that this image was not added on its own merits, but added because you were not happy with the previous image's removal, and so wanted to try and keep it without breaking any policy. You claim that there is a consensus on the talk page, but a small, localised discussion can hardly be used as justification to ignore policy. The discussion there does not address policy- it could even be interpretted as showing a deliberate disregard for it. J Milburn (talk) 22:45, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is no abuse here; the image conforms to WP:NFCC. The image was added because an image was needed there after the earlier image was removed. Your comment's inferences about my motivations do not assume good faith and are incorrect: the image was put there on its own merits. Talk:Autism #Asperger image is not a "small, localised discussion": it is a long thread involving five editors (so far), and that thread is significantly longer than this one. Eubulides (talk) 23:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • You're actually admitting that this image was added because the old one was removed- your assertion that "an image was needed there after the earlier image was removed" is clearly wrong, and shows no respect for the consensus at the earlier IfD. J Milburn (talk) 16:38, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is a need for an image showing the history of autism; this assertion is not "clearly wrong", unless one takes an extreme interpretation that would result in no image being needed anywhere in Wikipedia. I don't much care which historical image is used, as long as we can use some decent image. Since all the available images are non-free, we'll have to use a non-free one; this clearly conform to Wikipedia policy, and claims to the otherwise are unfounded. The consensus on the talk page was to keep this image; the consensus on the earlier IfD was about another, quite different, and less-relevant, image. Eubulides (talk) 06:46, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Erm, why is an image needed to illustrate the history of Asperger's syndrome? Someone can understand a history of Asperger's syndrome without a picture- the fact that you simply want an illustration shows you are approaching the matter from the wrong way. If an image is required, it is required- it would be of a specific thing. As it happens, nothing specific needs to be illustrated, you are merely claiming that an illustration related to the section is required. There is a real difference, and if you can't see that, I really think you should avoid uploading non-free content in the future. Compare- Grant Wood is a fairly good example to use here. The image of the painting is necessary, as the painting is discussed at length, and it is specifically the painting that is being illustrated in a section relevant to it. That is completely acceptable- using that image improves the article massively, as what the picture looks like is extremely important. By comparison, we do not need "an image showing the history of" Wood himself- there's no need to stick a picture of him as a young man (any picture featuring him as a young man, or relating to his youth) in the "life and career" section. Basically- there is never "a need for any old picture", there is only "a need for X picture/a picture explicitly showing X", and said pictures would be needed because a knowledge of their appearance would be greatly beneficial (or even necessary) to understand the text. J Milburn (talk) 12:04, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The generic argument above is circular, and could just as easily apply to any fair-use image. There is absolutely no requirement that Grant Wood must contain File:Americangothic.jpg; the article could just as easily briefly describe the iconic image, with people who really cared about the image's detailed appearance going to the American Gothic article to see it. Furthermore, the fair-use rationale in File:Americangothic.jpg for Grant Wood is more stilted and formulaic than the fair-use rationale in File:Asperger-Vienna-clinic.jpeg. More importantly, the comment above that Wood's personal appearance is irrelevant to Grant Wood is simply bizarre. What Grant Wood most needs is an image of Wood himself, not of his most-famous painting, because the Grant Wood article is supposed to be about the person, not merely about the person's most-famous work. Grant Wood would be much stronger if it dumped American Gothic and instead used one of Wood's self-portraits. If there's some desire to illustrate the article with some of Wood's work, the article could easily use some of Wood's work that is now in the public ___domain. In short, the case for Grant Wood being fair use of its image is far, far weaker than Autism #History's use of its image. Eubulides (talk) 05:32, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, a specific rationale is required for each article that the image appears in, detailing why it is necessary in that article, what it specifically shows and why it is irreplaceable for that use. Generic, general fair use rationales are not acceptable- rationales are not there so that the image isn't deleted, they are there to explain each use in detail, and provide an explanation of why our general policy of "free content only" should be bent in this case. Bots would be able to tell that there is no valid rationale, the history article is not even mentioned on the image page. This just further demonstrates your lack of understanding of, or lack of respect for, our non-free content guidelines, policies and practices. J Milburn (talk) 16:44, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Including a link to the article in the "fair use in" template does not constitute a fair use rationale, and nor does the generic rubbish posted below. Specific explanations are required. J Milburn (talk) 12:04, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for acknowledging that your earlier claim "the history article is not even mentioned on the image page" is incorrect. The article page does contain specific explanations, not "general rubbish", even if they are explanations that you don't agree with. Eubulides (talk) 05:32, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep there is clear consensus on the talk page for autism that the image is useful. One editor does not like the image used. No it is not a head count, but one editor thinking it violates policy and others that agree in their disagreement with that one editor sounds like a consensus to me. Dbrodbeck (talk) 00:37, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • So, no arguments that the image does meet policy, only an argument that nominating this image for deletion is somehow out of process? If you have an issue with my conduct, contact me on my talk page. J Milburn (talk) 16:52, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Image fails WP:NFCC#8 as much as the last one did. You have to ask yourself — would the reader be disadvantaged in his understanding of autism and the history of Asperger's Syndrome? If the answer is no, the image must be deleted. Stifle (talk) 16:44, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. A picture of Asperger - interacting with a child - does illustrate that autism affects real people more clearly then words could and it makes the content of the article more real then words, or even the MRI images, ever could. So, I'd say keep for the reason that it does enhance the article.

A possible copyright violation would be a stronger, more practical reason, to not include them, but that does not appear to be the reason for the nominations. Fenke (talk) 09:05, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    • Sorry, but that's rubbish. You're saying a picture of a random person interacting with a child somehow explains that "autism affects real people" any better than a new, free photograph could? Stifle (talk) 18:54, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I agree with Fenke that it humanizes the history and the people involved, including Asperger and those suffering from the disorder. Yes, historical pictures can perform this function better than a new, free photograph - particularly since the section is the historyof Autism. Also, for a moment compare the online wiki encyclopedia to the traditional print of encyclopedias and texts. Photographs are not simply to "pretty up" the page but serve the purpose or reinforcement through non-repetitive means and appealing in a different fashion, which I believe this photograph follows this traditional intent. As I have already stated, given the content of the section, this historical picture performs this function better than a new, free photograph could. blondtraillite (talk) 15:38, 03 April 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.95.0.73 (talk) [reply]
    • "Traditional intent" hardly applies, as this isn't exactly a traditional encyclopedia. What you have said has nothing to do with our policies, guidelines or goals. Sure, this illustrates Asperger talking to a child better than a modern, free image does- but does that need to be illustrated? Of course not. Could someone please close this discussion? J Milburn (talk) 23:04, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

07042007094.jpg

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Aervanath (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 13:06, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:07042007094.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Russianroulette2004 (notify | contribs).
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.

PontormoStJohn.jpg

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: keep. Slavish copying. No creative elements added. -Nv8200p talk 01:56, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:PontormoStJohn.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Wetman (notify | contribs).
No need to delete: The websites claim of copyright is spurious. The author is very long dead and this work is very much public ___domain. The curve of the wall in neither here nor there or relevant. Giano (talk) 21:31, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It does include the pietra serena framing. If deleting this image improves Wikipedia in any way at all, then I'm for deleting, though I uploaded it. I've given up uploading images.--Wetman (talk) 17:28, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Could someone do a crop? Johnbod (talk) 18:05, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the discussion on Template talk:PD-art, it is "[doing] nothing more than accurately convey the underlying image." ViperSnake151 19:11, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Gutierrez-elian.JPG

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 11:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gutierrez-elian.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Agutierrezjr (notify | contribs).
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2009_March_18&oldid=1138516541"