Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 January 25

< January 24	January 26 >

January 25

File:Cuellarfuneral.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 objections. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 01:03, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free photograph of a public event. Fails any number of NFCC: no source, no explanation how it meets NFCC8, no meaningful rationale. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:47, 25 January 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:3-3-06 3.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 - no objections. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 01:03, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unused / orphaned image of low quality that does not have a description giving it low if any current encyclopedic value. Calmer Waters 16:10, 25 January 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:30-03-07 2121.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 orphan and of no value. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 01:07, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated orphaned image of poor image quality of little or no encyclopedic value Calmer Waters 16:40, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, useless. Nyttend (talk) 03:07, 26 January 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:BzeHattie1961.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 objections. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 01:06, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No source or copyright information; possible copyvio. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:07, 25 January 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:Pend equation 1.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 - orphan. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 01:05, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, was replaced on Harmonograph using <math>. Svick (talk) 18:54, 25 January 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:Pend equation 2.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. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 01:05, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, was replaced on Harmonograph using <math>. Svick (talk) 18:55, 25 January 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:Pend equation 3.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 - orphan. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 01:05, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, was replaced on Harmonograph using <math>. Svick (talk) 18:55, 25 January 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:Dachau cold water immersion.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: speedy keep; obviously disruptive nomination by nazi apologist SPA. Nominator blocked. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:48, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The image looks very much fake. Hands and heads of people are clearly placed on the bodies using image manipulating tools. Uniforms are looking VERY MUCH fake and manipulated. The uploader didn't provide any proof for the reference. Even if he did, the reference which is a Journal should provide that from where did they get this image? HW-lied (talk) 19:19, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the image indeed appears in the BMJ article. Verifiability not truth. –xeno^talk 19:28, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You say it? Where is your proof?HW-lied (talk) 19:31, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I signed up for a free account here: http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/313/7070/1453 and the image indeed appears in the article. –xeno^talk 19:34, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing on that page. It needs login! Please provide a free source for that image, which general public can access without need for registering.HW-lied (talk) 19:39, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Registration is free, not that it would matter (see Wikipedia:V#Access to sources). –xeno^talk 19:44, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - If you look at HW-lied's edits you'll see that he's got some sort of agenda to get that image removed. The only edits he's done have been to remove the image from an article and now he's trying to get it deleted. He claims the image is fake yet provides no proof. XXX antiuser ^eh? 19:43, 25 January 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:Hmsdiagram.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, no objections. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 01:08, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At Homestead-Miami Speedway, a clearer, better svg image has been added. B-Machine (talk) 20:07, 25 January 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:Conan on the tonight show2.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: keep. The general consensus is that this is an important image central to Conan O'Brien's TV personality while he appeared on the Tonight Show. It is asserted that this is irreplaceable because cameras are not allowed into the studio. Concerns that it isn't enough to justify a non-free image have been overwhelmingly rejected in this discussion. Please note: I have not taken into account any claims of precedence. This is not a valid deletion discussion criteria. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 01:44, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unjustifiable FU image; it is not so informational or illustrative that lack of this image would be detrimental to reader understanding. ÷seresin 22:43, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep - Similar images have been used for related (c.f. - Johnny_Carson, David Letterman, and Jay Leno) articles, and have not been removed. Thus, deleting this image would set a precedent to delete all other images on the other talk-show related articles. The images used in the Conan O'Brien article should not be an exception, and thus should not be deleted. Furthermore, the image is justifiable for use on the Conan O'Brien page because it does not violate any of the criteria under WP:SPEEDY#Files. The image clearly shows and demonstrates the visual aspects of the topic that mere prose can not. Furthermore, there is no replaceable free image alternative. Soggybread (talk) 00:28, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Ignoring the fact that you demonstrably do not understand what speedy keep means, nor do you understand that WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS is a wholly invalid rationale, and finally that you are applying speedy criteria when another set is applicable (viz. these), you will be pleased to know that all comparable images I found have been dealt with now. Please make an argument that has anything at all to do with how this image satisfied our NFCC, specifically NFCC.8 ÷seresin 00:49, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thanks for responding! :) I'm still a newbie here, so I've got lots to learn. But I've re-edited my arguments right now to try get them to make more sense. Sorry about any confusion through my neophyte arguments! :)Soggybread (talk) 01:27, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Keep -This image does not violate WP:NFCC#8 because O'Brien's presence and layout of his monologue are clearly described in the article. This image supplements to the understanding of O'Brien's monologue greatly. The removal of this image would be detrimental to understanding the environment in which O'Brien performs his act.Soggybread (talk) 01:24, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I think it's valid to keep an image of O'Brien's opening monologue shot, as it is an integral part of his public persona.--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 01:10, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - does violate non-free. O'Brien's appearance does not change during the show, and free images of him are already in his article. One does not need to see him standing and talking to understand the concept, so its use does not add anything to the article. And, again, it is replaceable with free versions as the show was filmed in front of a live audience. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 15:55, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Since audience members are not permitted to bring cameras/video recorders to a taping, I don't think this image is replaceable with a free version Soggybread (talk) 16:25, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep - Per above. Gage (talk) 23:41, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Again, cameras are not allowed in the studio during taping, and his show is not even in production anymore, so it's highly unlikely a free version exists elsewhere. It's contextually significant.—DMCer™ 02:43, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as an appropriate image here. Also, this image can be tied to the references in gaming media that compared the bg of Conan's monologues to a Super Mario Game, further tying the image to context. --MASEM (t) 03:04, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The components of this image are (a) the man, of whom there are contemporary libre-licensed images available on Wikimedia Commons, and (b) the background image, on which there is no reliably sourced critical commentary or discussion in the article. The image's caption indicates that the subject of the screenshot is giving a speech, the aesthetic performance aspects of which are not discussed, and do not need to be seen to understand. Having read the pertinent sections of the article, the image is replaceable by libre-licensed text explaining that [Conan O'Brien] regularly stood in front of his audience and gave speeches/monologues to the same. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 03:20, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Same as below. Terrible FUR. I cannot determine whether the image is justified with such a weak FUR. -Andrew c ^[talk] 05:11, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Obvious delete: First the "purpose of use" on the rationale says the prose discusses what the image depicts. Er, no, not really; just that there is a monologue. So? We need an image to prove he does a monologue? This makes it a blatant fail of WP:NFCC #1 in that it has already been replaced by text noting that he performs a monologue. Also note that The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson does just fine noting Carson performed a monologue, doing so without including a non-free image showing him doing a monologue. Second There is nothing historically significant about Conan O'Brien appearing before a backdrop in a screenshot that is any more significant than File:O'Brien, Conan (crop).jpg, which is better resolution anyways. This makes it a blatant fail of WP:NFCC #8. The keep arguments here are remarkably weak, with no insult intended to the proponents of those arguments. Keep because no cameras are allowed on set? Where is that in the NFCC? Keep because his monologue is integral to his persona? Where is that discussed in the article? Is that referenced? No. Background is like Super Mario? Not discussed in article, not referenced (obviously very important <cough>). Keep because this means we'd delete other monologue shots from Jay Leno, The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, David Letterman, Late Night with David Letterman, Johnny Carson and The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson? There's not a single non-free monologue shot on any of those articles. Not one. Of the keep arguments so far, there's not one that holds water. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:37, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe a bit blunt and not so concise, but kudos. -Andrew c ^[talk] 20:46, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep: Because I don't and won't have a Wiki account I don't know if my voice holds any weight, but the picture of the Tonight Show host -- any Tonight Show host -- doing the monologue of the Tonight Show is iconic. It is literally one of those cases where a picture says a thousand words. There is only one other picture as strong, and that is the one of the Tonight Show host at his desk with a guest. It is impossible to have any Tonight Show picture which is fully free by Wikipedia standards (= pirated), but the trade-off is to visually ignore this highly significant, highly (if not most) notable part of the subject's career. Not to allow such a picture where one exists is to deliberately censor out the Tonight Show part of a Tonight Show host's career -- ironic, since the Tonight Show is often considered the pinnacle of a stand-up comic's career. - Tenebris
Note to closing admin: Part of the issue with having a slew of non-free Conan images is WP:NFCC #3a. While perhaps individually, there may be some merit behind these images, as a group, it seems like non-free image over-use. Perhaps this is more of an editorial decision to decide which, if any, to keep, but it still remains that one editor, on January 24, added what IMO would be way too many non-free images to these articles. So I'd ask that the closing admin consider the situation, and the lot of images as a whole, in addition to examining the merits of each individual image. -Andrew c ^[talk] 17:23, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I completely agree with Andrew c's assessment.--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 08:03, 1 February 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:The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien interview.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: The result of the discussion was: No Consensus. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 00:39, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unjustifiable FU image; it is not so informational or illustrative that lack of this image would be detrimental to reader understanding. ÷seresin 22:43, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep - Justifiable for use on the main Tonight Show article. Gage (talk) 23:10, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep - Removal of this image would be detrimental to reader understanding because this image illustrates O'Brien's tenure as the host of the Tonight Show. This image shows both the stage and environment in which the Tonight Show was hosted, greatly contributing to reader understanding. Does not violate WP:NFCC#8.
Strong keep - As per above, the image important as O'Brien is most famous for 2 things, his opening monologue, and his desk interview with celebrities. Additionally, this particular celebrity appearance is discussed in the section.--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 01:11, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not justifiable for either article. A reader does NOT need to "see" two people talking to understand that it is what they did. And, again, these all were easily replacable with free versions. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 15:54, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Since audience members are not permitted to bring cameras/video recorders to a taping, I don't think this image is replaceable with a free version Soggybread (talk) 16:25, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - As the article mentions, Will Ferrell bookended the show by being the first and last guest on a now defunct program. He's mentioned many times, and the image illustrates much of the context, per WP:NFCC, p. 8.—DMCer™ 02:49, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Adds nothing as we already have Conan images and Farrell images. No notable aspects of the desk/interview set to be discussed. The fact Farrell was his first and last guest can be mentioned in text. --MASEM (t) 03:05, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fix the fair use rationale before we decide if it is a justified use. As it stands, IMO, any image with a generic FUR (that isn't one of the templates like album cover or company logo), such as this Article discusses what the image depicts. It does not limit the copyright holder's ability to profit from the work., should be outright deleted. This image is used in two different articles, so the justification for each use should be different, at least to some degree. And they should be tailored to the specific use, and actually say something poignant. If such a justification cannot be bothered to be written for the image (per WP:FURG), then I don't see the point in arguing for keeping it. -Andrew c ^[talk] 05:10, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep: Because I don't and won't have a Wiki account I don't know if my voice holds any weight, but the picture of the Tonight Show host -- any Tonight Show host -- interviewing a guest at the Tonight Show is iconic. It is literally one of those cases where a picture says a thousand words. There is only one other picture as strong, and that is the one of the Tonight Show host doing his Tonight Show monologue. It is impossible to have any Tonight Show picture which is fully free by Wikipedia standards (= pirated), but the trade-off is to visually ignore this highly significant, highly (if not most) notable part of the subject's career. Not to allow such a picture where one exists is to deliberately censor out the Tonight Show part of a Tonight Show host's career -- ironic, since the Tonight Show is often considered the pinnacle of a stand-up comic's career. - Tenebris
- I don't think that this will be an issue. Your comments have been noted. Please though, feel free to sign up. You don't have to reveal anything about yourself and it's really simple. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 13:39, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The image is rationaled for use because it "discusses what the image depicts." It depicts two men for whom we have contemporary free-use/libre-licensed images on a set for which we have no reliable sourced critical commentary for its appearance or importance thereof. Nothing in the article warrants using copyrighted material to depict what is not even discussed in the article. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 17:53, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete there are many non-free images in this article, which in itself can cause us issues under fair use doctrine. There are other non-free images of him giving an interview. This is totally surplus to requirements. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 01:58, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete' - clear fail of NFCC#8 and we must credit reader's with enough understanding to see libre images of the subjects and imagine them sitting. replacing with either text, or free images and text, will not significantly harm reader's understanding of the topic - Peripitus (Talk) 20:50, 2 February 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:Conan childhood young.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. Non-free image does not add anything to the article on Conan O'Brien. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 01:47, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unjustifiable FU image; it is not so informational or illustrative that lack of this image would be detrimental to reader understanding. ÷seresin 22:43, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Image is not mentioned in the article. Thus, I agree this should not be included.Soggybread (talk) 01:11, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Image is not mentioned, describes nothing notable about O'Brien except that he was a cute kid, and that doesn't help our purpose.--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 01:12, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete total non-free violation. Completely unjustifiable, particularly for someone not known as being a famous child actor or anything. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 15:49, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No justification for fair use of this image. As mentioned above lacks the contextual significance requiring its use. A random childhood image of the entertainer Calmer Waters 16:35, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The pic's not relevant to the article. Jwesley₇₈ 00:05, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete - Per above. Gage (talk) 00:40, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - While it's a rare image and nice to look at while browsing the article, I don't think a strong enough case can be made for inclusion under Wikipedia:NFCC#8.—DMCer™ 02:46, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, obviously. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:44, 27 January 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:U2 ConanO.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: The result of the discussion was: No Consensus. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 01:08, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unjustifiable FU image; it is not so informational or illustrative that lack of this image would be detrimental to reader understanding. ÷seresin 22:43, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep - Removal of this image would be detrimental to reader understanding because this image illustrates O'Brien's tenure as the host of the Late Night show. This image shows both the stage and environment in which the Late Night show was hosted, greatly contributing to reader understanding. Does not violate WP:NFCC#8.Soggybread (talk) 01:26, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - as per above.--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 01:13, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, agree it is unjustifable, and disagree with the assertion that it is somehow necessary for an reading to understand that O'Brien hosted the show. Seeing the specific stage and environment are not necessary, and further this is easily replacable with a non-free image as the shows were all filmed before live audiences. No justification for violating non-free when alternatives are obtainable. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 15:51, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Since audience members are not permitted to bring cameras/video recorders to a taping, I don't think this image is replaceable with a free version Soggybread (talk) 16:26, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The image clearly shows what an average interview on the show looks like. Why not keep it? Shark96z (talk · contribs) 21:14, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Collectonian. This is completely unnecessary and easily replaceable. Furthermore, wow, what a horrible image! (Yes, I DON'T LIKE IT) If we are going to violate our WP:FUC we should at least do so with something decent. JBsupreme (talk) 21:42, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Your reasoning seems vague to me. Would you mind elaborating on "easily replaceable" and "what a horrible image"? Because as they stand, your comments seem subjective rather than NPOV.--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 02:22, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This adds a lot to the article; and provides a legitimate rationale. It got a lot of press at the time; it was one of the only shows (if not the only show) where Conan had a single guest, and his manager said they'd been trying to book U2 - more than any other band - for years.—DMCer™ 02:29, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- As it stands, the fair use rationale is abhorrently weak: Use of the graphic visually identifies the program in a manner that mere prose cannot, and meets all criteria in WP:NFCC. Saying something doesn't mean it is true. This FUR is an empty assertion, not a justification or, ahem, 'rationale'. Just like saying "this adds a lot to the article; and provides a legitimate rationale." are empty. Furthermore, having a lot of press is not a NFCC. There are probably dozens of situations where we could say "this is the only time Conan did X on his show", yet we don't need an image for every one of these unique situations. Why not keep it? Why keep it? -Andrew c ^[talk] 05:02, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment. While the article doesn't specifically discuss U2's appearance on the show (and granted, my reasoning wasn't really relevant), the article devotes a lot of space discussing O'Brien's tenure as host of Late Night. As there are currently no other images of him doing so — cameras not being allowed in and all — and as the image illustrates O'Brien with guests on his now-defunct set, I believe the sole Late Night image does not violate WP:NFCC#8. It's not as if there's a gallery on similar interviewing images in the article that serve the same purpose. I'll take a look at the rationale.Edit - I've expanded the admittedly weak rationale.—DMCer™ 19:27, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Wikipedia already uses both libre and non-free imagery to depict the band, and similarly free/libre contemporary images of O'Brien also exist on the Commons. The article doesn't discuss the image or its contents whatsoever, much less provide any reliably sourced critical commentary on the same. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 17:57, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - as stated we have free images of all of the subjects. This image just shows them in proximity and adds little to the article on O'Brien. I also note that the rationale is for a different article to the one used and is inadequate and inappropriate for the current use. I can see no sourced discussion in the article that hinges on this image, rather than either no image or free images of the subject. - Peripitus (Talk) 07:30, 2 February 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:Colbert conan dance.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 - There are arguments below that the image is replaceable (fails WP:NFCC#1), does not increase reader's understanding sufficiently (fails WP:NFCC#8) and that it is excessive as there are a sufficiency of non-free images (fails WP:NFCC#3a). I see that those seeking to keep this image have not sufficiently rebutted these assertions - Peripitus (Talk) 07:25, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unjustifiable FU image; it is not so informational or illustrative that lack of this image would be detrimental to reader understanding. ÷seresin 22:44, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This image does not violate WP:NFCC#8 because O'Brien's comedy and mannerisms are clearly described in the article. This image supplements to the understanding of O'Brien's mannerisms greatly. The removal of this image would be detrimental to understanding the physical comedy that O'Brien employs. Soggybread (talk) 01:02, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - An image of the string dance is important for O'Brien's article, yet not necessarily one with Colbert doing it with him, nor any other celebrity.--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 01:15, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as above, this image is a violation of non-free as it is easily replaceable with a free image. Conan isn't dead, and until Friday the show was filmed before a live studio audience. Nor is his doing of the string dance relevant to Conan as a whole, only his mannerisms in a single series. It is not detrimental to the reader to not see it in an article if that involves using a non-free image instead of getting a free alternative. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 15:53, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Since audience members are not permitted to bring cameras/video recorders to a taping, I don't think this image is replaceable with a free version Soggybread (talk) 16:26, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - That is a false argument, he could perform the dance outside of the studio. JBsupreme (talk) 21:42, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - JBsupreme's is just as false an argument, because part of the appeal of the string dance is that it has only been performed when Conan is in his studio and the crowd is particularly enthralled.--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 22:05, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      - Do you have a reliable source that states that? Or one that says that no one has ever gotten a camera into a taping? -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 23:11, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        I sense errant logic on Collectonian's part. The rules are clearly against bringing a camera in, and that's what we should base our decision on, rather than the offchance that someone broke the rules of Universal's studio. Of course, the situation would change if a WP editor happens to come across such a photo, though I'm not even sure if the photo would be permitted in such a case.--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 02:27, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        Then I'd suggest checking your senses. A quick search on Flickr finds over 1700 photos of Conan, including the studio. Again, what reliable source do you have to claim that it is against the rules to bring in a camera? And that none has ever made it past? Conan did also film frequently out of studio, and his dancing was never limited to just in studio work. Not this best of images, but found within seconds[1] clearly folks could easily sneak in cameras (if there is such a rule)...and of course you negate cell phone cameras. And why would such a photo not be usable, so long as it was released under the appropriate license. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 02:40, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        First off, let's all remember to WP:Be civil. I sense that you took my last comment personally, so I'll try to direct my argument more at the topic and less at you. Secondly, the rule is referenced here.--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 03:50, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This is a trademark; and his arguably his most famous mannerism. It illustrates something he acted out at the open of almost every show. It's justifiable, and would be helpful on the show page as well. Because he's now off the air, and because camera's aren't allowed in during taping, it's quite unlikely a free version exists.—DMCer™ 02:34, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Just because it is now off the air does not suddenly mean no free version exists. Its highly likely that free ones do exist. Again, as I asked above, what reliable source claims no cameras of any kind were allowed in the studio? Did they take away people's cell phones? Kick them out? What? -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 02:40, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - It's a blanket rule for NBC shows, which specifically outlines the rule for the Tonight Show. You can view it here.--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 03:50, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - So a single source makes the claim, and that means its impossible? So how is it that, as noted above, there are plenty of Flickr images showing otherwise? Further, again, how many images are necessary to indicate what Conan O'Brien looks like? There is already a free image of him that does that. This image doesn't "illustrate" his dance. A dance is a series of moves, not a single frozen moment. This image doesn't enhance the reader experience, it doesn't show the dance, and no one loses if its removed. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 04:07, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      - Someone provided a source for the no camera rule; that doesn't mean that's the only source there is. Since when is one source a sign of weakness? The Flickr link above states it was taken in Chicago, and it clearly isn't during a taping of the show; so again, it's not likely that a single free version exists.—DMCer™ 17:42, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      - Here is a photograph of a Tonight Show ticket that clearly states you are not allowed cameras at the studio. Link. Soggybread (talk) 09:52, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        And? That does not mean no one ever has, and as Andrew c asks, is there some law forbidding Conan from doing the dance outside of the studio? I doubt it. What's to stop anyone from just asking if they can see him dance for a moment for a picture. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 14:30, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        Should someone have taken a picture while the show was taping, that picture is the copyright of NBC. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 01:52, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Is it totally improbable that Conan would ever do this dance in a public context? At a convention, at an awards red-carpet, or any number of other public venues where a user could take a photo? Seems replaceable to me. This isn't something proprietary to The Tonight Show. -Andrew c ^[talk] 04:57, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The article's only reference to this media was cited to a fork of an older version of the article itself; I've commented out the material pending reliable sourcing. This image now depicts nothing discussed, sourced, or critically commented upon in the article. This is without even discussing (a) the capacity of demonstrating a dance with a static frame of imagery, or (b) the potential replacability of the media. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 18:05, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Clarification - I've undone your commenting out, and added instead a "citation needed" tag.--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 08:11, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, I don't think that it is required. There are far too many fair use images already on this article, and I don't believe that we need this to illustrate his shenanigans or persona. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 02:00, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No source. Useless image that really shows nothing. A video would be better, but an image frozen at Conan making a constipated-face expression and looking at the floor, not so much. I'll take Remove for 500, Alex. —Mike Allen 02:27, 2 February 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:Simpsonconan.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: keep, general consensus is that illustrates the fact that he appeared on The Simpsons. It has been suggested in the discussion that the article text is inadequate, but as this can be fixed this is not sufficient to delete. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 01:56, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unjustifiable FU image; it is not so informational or illustrative that lack of this image would be detrimental to reader understanding. ÷seresin 22:47, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This image does not violate WP:NFCC#8 because O'Brien's cameo and voice work (and especially his appearance on The Simpsons) are clearly described and talked about in the article. This image supplements to the understanding of O'Brien's appearances on The Simpsons and his other cameos greatly. The removal of this image would be detrimental to understanding the appearances that O'Brien has taken part in.Soggybread (talk) 01:17, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Image demonstrates O'Brien's mainstream fame, and it is described in the section. Not mere decoration.--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 01:16, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete agree with nom. This image is NOT crucial to understanding Conan's appearance on the Simpsons and its use does not meet NFCC. Removal is not detrimental in the least. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 15:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The article mentions The Simpsons over 10 times; it's where Conan got his start, and his appearance on the show reflects his rising career at the time. Additionally, there's surely no free version of this. I see no violation of WP:NFCC#8 here.—DMCer™ 02:53, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Deja vu. We went through this and weeded it out years ago, when people tried to get every Simpson, South Park, and Family Guy likeness in celebrity articles. While Conan was a writer on the show, making his situation a bit different from celebrity appearances, seeing how he was illustrated doesn't help us understand his writing for the show, and the use seems the same as any other celebrity appearance (which we rightly purged, for the most part, years ago). -Andrew c ^[talk] 05:05, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Can you provide discussion archival links for this discussion to cross-reference? — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 18:10, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep: Because I don't and won't have a Wiki account I don't know if my voice holds any weight, but part of O'Brien's Simpsons writing career has been to write one of the top five Simpsons episodes of all time (Marge vs. the Monorail), and he has been a producer throughout. That makes his contribution to the Simpsons highly significant and notable. This picture of him as a Simpsons character illustrates both connections - the previous Simpsons link and the transition to the Late Show. Thus it does add to the article and to understanding this part of his career in a way no other celebrity-Simpsons image does. Not to allow such a picture where one exists is to deliberately censor out this part of his career. - Tenebris
Delete. The article only notes that Mr. O'Brien was animated on The Simpsons without any reliably sourced commentary on the same. He is therefore one of the hundreds if not thousands of similarly-animated celebrities without any significance to this particular appearance. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 18:10, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Let us remember that he is different from the hundreds, if not thousands, in that he began his career as a writer for the show, returning to cameo after his career blossomed further.--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 08:09, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - But that doesn't make the style or aesthetics of his particular animation (which would be illustrated by this non-free image) any more significant than any other, at least not according to the article. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 14:11, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - I disagree. Because I think that there is more significance to the image than style and aesthetics. I agree, however, that, as of yet, valid significance is not present in the text to support the image, but I don't think that's enough reason to delete it. I think it should have been discussed on the talk page first.--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 23:55, 1 February 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:Jimmy fallon on late night.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 - unjustifiable non free image. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 01:37, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unjustifiable FU image; it is not so informational or illustrative that lack of this image would be detrimental to reader understanding. ÷seresin 22:48, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non-free image for which a free alternative is highly likely to exist, and does not add value to the article. One can understand the concept of this person standing a talking without a picture of him doing so. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 15:58, 26 January 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:DroppedImage.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, not useful.

Orphaned image that I cannot see a use for here. Peripitus (Talk) 23:14, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, useless. Nyttend (talk) 03:07, 26 January 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:Cased-grand-cross.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:04, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

unneccessary non-free image. In one article there is already a non-free image of the cross, and in the other there is an image of the subject (Goering) wearing the medal. All this image adds is the presentation case - not a necessary thing for reader's understanding of either topic. Noted that at present the image file also lacks any form of source or rationale. Peripitus (Talk) 23:35, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since I'm adding the cased medal pic for the 1914 Grand Cross, this will show the differences in how it was awarded. I think it's relevent. Expatkiwi (Talk) 23:43, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete. This is definitely replaceable. The criteria is that there is no free version available, but that doesn't mean we can't one day get one. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 01:36, 2 February 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:Johnny depp mad hatter.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 objections. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 01:09, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free image that is not discussed in the article. There is no sourced discussion of Depp's appearance as this character and the image is largely decorative. Does not signficantly add to reader's understanding - fails WP:NFCC#8 Peripitus (Talk) 23:50, 25 January 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.