Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 March 23

< March 22	March 24 >

March 23

Drafter-Design-L.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 ⚡ 08:05, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Drafter-Design-L.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Bmparke (notify | contribs).

Not used, assosiated article was deleted per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Archiculture. Sherool (talk) 00:04, 23 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.

Colony_Symbol.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 ⚡ 08:05, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not used (though the image page itself contains an (unsourced) article of sorts, but nothing we can rely use IMHO, Sherool (talk) 01:05, 23 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.

Kripa_shankar_2004.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 ⚡ 08:05, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kripa_shankar_2004.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Kripashankarsharma (notify | contribs).

Unused personal photo. Sherool (talk) 01:30, 23 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.

Margaret-whitehouse.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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:13, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Margaret-whitehouse.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Americasroof (notify | contribs).

Book cover for book not covered in teh article. Damiens.rf 01:38, 23 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.

Stevia(July).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. No licensing information provided by uploader. -Nv8200p talk 02:57, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Stevia(July).JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Skubasteve834 (notify | contribs).

Invalid tag, no licensing information exists. This was not uploaded during the several-month window when files were GFDL by default. {{nld}} was reverted, and I'd rather not revert-war. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 01:59, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I reverted the deletion tag because the rationale is invalid, and could find no deletion discussion until now. "GDFL by default" is irrelevant here. Two points are crystal clear: (1) GDFL can be presumed. Other editors believe in good faith that this image has been created by the uploader who, by uploading it to Wikipedia, has released it as public ___domain or under GDFL. The GDFL-presumed tag was properly placed, and does not need a "default" status to exist on this image. (2) The description by the uploader "A picture of my stevia plant in St Louis" is a clear and unambiguous statement that the image was created by the uploader. =Axlq 03:44, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is, GFDL cannot be presumed. Please read the text, [1] "This License applies to any manual or other work, in any medium, that contains a notice placed by the copyright holder saying it can be distributed under the terms of this License." Obviously there is no clause that someone can presume what someone intended to do with their copyright, nor is that a standard practice in copyright law. The "GDFL by default" is a status that many of these "presumed" images have by nature of the upload text on the dates they were uploaded (like this one). This tag is a legacy tag; no new images can be added with it, and the old ones are slowly being sorted out. Many uploaders specified without using a tag ([2]), others say more confusing things like "free to use", which is harder to sort out, legally. This image, I'm afraid, isn't confusing from a legal standpoint. No person can change an image's licensing to GFDL except the current copyright holder. That person is still the uploader, who never released it under a free license. Stevia is a fairly common plant, so it should be easily replaceable if the uploader fails to respond. If they come back after it has been deleted, they can simply have it undeleted. Assuming good faith is not a reason to take someone's copyright away from them. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 04:12, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete since license cannot be verified. It should be straightforward to get a verifiably free equivalent image. Stifle (talk) 12:47, 29 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.

Cartoon_Gabriella.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 ⚡ 08:05, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cartoon_Gabriella.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by 99ip (notify | contribs).

Not used, tagged as CC-BY-3.0 but the description page says ". Do not use without permission." wich is mutualy exclusive with the choosen license. Sherool (talk) 02:24, 23 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.

David_Doyle_US_Marine.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 ⚡ 08:05, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:David_Doyle_US_Marine.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Stahlhammer89 (notify | contribs).

Not used since the assisiated article was deleted. Sherool (talk) 02:29, 23 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.

David_Doyle_Closeup.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 ⚡ 08:05, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:David_Doyle_Closeup.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Stahlhammer89 (notify | contribs).

Not used since the assisiated article was deleted. Sherool (talk) 02:30, 23 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.

Eaststirlingkit.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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:05, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eaststirlingkit.PNG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Footballexpert (notify | contribs).

Unused, contrary to WP:FOOTY kit style guidelines. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:58, 23 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.

Kit body fmgtest.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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:05, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kit body fmgtest.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Chandler (notify | contribs).

Unused, contrary to WP:FOOTY kit style guidelines. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:58, 23 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.

Gemini 6 views Gemini 7.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 Papa November (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:03, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gemini 6 views Gemini 7.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Rotem Dan (notify | contribs).

Low-res version of Commons img Papa November (talk) 21:22, 23 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.