Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 April 5

< April 4	April 6 >

April 5

File:Shania Twain - You Lay a Whole Lot of Love on Me.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 - better quality uploaded. The Helpful One 23:28, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So low quality that it's completely illegible. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:25, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Considering it is quite a rare single this was the only image of the cover I could find at the time, however I have now found and uploaded a better quality one to replace it. Dell9300 (talk) 11:10, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Shorts 360, size compare.gif

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F7 by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:10, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The comparison can be made without resorting to the use of a non-free image. Fails NFCC #8. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:23, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Scott Tenorman Must Die.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Invalid FUR--this is not critically discussed. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:05, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Appointment.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The current revision can be deleted as F1 or F9 (see File:Appointment (film).jpg). The older revisions may or may not be free. In either case, they look useless, so I think that they should be deleted regardless of their copyright status. Stefan2 (talk) 14:16, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:File name.ext

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: Erroneous Nomination. When following the listing instructions (step 2), you need to replace "File_name.ext" with the actual name of the file. You'll also want to put the name of the uploader just after "Uploader=", and your reason for deletion just after "Reason=". Feel free to just replace this entire section with the corrected template. If you are still having trouble, ask for help at WT:FFD or at my talk page. AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:07, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:File name.ext (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by [[User talk:{{{Uploader}}}#File:File name.ext listed for deletion|{{{Uploader}}}]] ([{{fullurl:User talk:{{{Uploader}}}|action=edit&preload=Template:Fdw_preload&editintro=Template:Fdw_editintro&section=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | [[Special:Contributions/{{{Uploader}}}|contribs]] | [[Special:ListFiles/{{{Uploader}}}|uploads]] | [[Special:Log/upload/{{{Uploader}}}|upload log]]).

Obsolete. Replace with File:ESRI logo 2012 small 63x43pixel blue and white.jpg SANNB (talk) 14:34, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Product banner image.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: deleted. The Helpful One 23:29, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pure advertisement. WP:NOTADVERT. Fleet Command (talk) 15:43, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NFCC#7 and WP:NFCC#10c. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:50, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:TOC Excitation and Oxidation Equations.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Such images are just unnecessary. That's what we have TeX for. Leyo 16:47, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Would you care to replace its current transclusion with TeX then? Because it's currently being used. Keep until it is replaced. Magog the Ogre (talk) 08:55, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could a chemist take a look at this attempt? As far as I know, atom symbols are not supposed to be written in italics, so I changed that but (hopefully) kept the rest identical to the original image. Is "hv" meant to be in italics or not?

Free radical oxidants formed:
$\mathrm {S} _{2}\mathrm {O} _{8}^{2-}{\underset {hv}{\longrightarrow }}2\mathrm {SO} _{4}^{-\bullet }$
$\mathrm {H} _{2}\mathrm {O} {\underset {hv}{\longrightarrow }}\mathrm {H} ^{+}+\mathrm {OH} ^{\bullet }$
$\mathrm {SO} _{4}^{-\bullet }+\mathrm {H} _{2}\mathrm {O} \longrightarrow \mathrm {SO} _{4}^{2-}+\mathrm {OH} ^{\bullet }+\mathrm {H} ^{+}$
Excitation of organics:
$\mathrm {R} {\underset {hv}{\longrightarrow }}\mathrm {R} ^{*}$
Oxidaton of organics:
$\mathrm {R} ^{*}+\mathrm {SO} _{4}^{-\bullet }+\mathrm {OH} ^{\bullet }\longrightarrow n\mathrm {CO} _{2}+\dots$

Stefan2 (talk) 12:49, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect, thank you. BTW: I think we should have a template like commons:Template:Use TeX and de:Vorlage:In TeX konvertieren, too. --Leyo 14:56, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per WP:CSD#F8.--Rockfang (talk) 00:12, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- It doesn't qualify for F8 because it has been proposed for deletion on Commons: Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:TOC Excitation and Oxidation Equations.jpg. --Stefan2 (talk) 01:09, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I don't see how a copy this image being nominated for deletion on Commons, which was done after I posted my delete suggestion here, makes this local copy fail F8. It is the same file format, same resolution, the license and source aren't being questioned, the local copy isn't marked as don't move to Commons, all of the relevant information was copied over, and neither copies are protected.--Rockfang (talk) 01:25, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Jeremy Meehan Picture.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned personal photo -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 16:54, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:A Hope for Home (logo - 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; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned with a CC 3.0 tag. We don't know the source of the logo or if it's free or non-free. We hope (talk) 16:58, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The file was moved from File:AHFHLogo2.png to File:A Hope for Home (logo - 2).png by DragonflySixtyseven (talk · contribs) at 13:36, 6 April 2012 (UTC). AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:07, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Airprishtina.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not a free Windows screenshot as licensed. Orphaned and likely a non free logo. We hope (talk) 17:02, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Miitary PTSD & TBI.png

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned image with incomplete explanation of source files and licenses. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 17:31, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Queenalia.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: Relisted at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 April 17#File:Queenalia.jpg. — ξ ^xplicit 01:21, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blurry jpg image. Source link dead. Author unknown. Most likely not PD but could be FUR with WP:NFCC#1 There may not be a free equivalent since she died in 1977. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 17:35, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - that the source site is down is not a reason to delete the image, and the nomination makes a good case to keep also - there's no possible free equivalent (this is allowed by WP:NFCI#10). I've provided the usage purpose to the fair use rationale. Identifying the author is not an absolute requirement, in this case the source is the Jordan government which is enough identification for policy purposes. Diego (talk) 22:39, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Image of murals at trinity college kandy chapel.png

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free image only used in a gallery. Stefan2 (talk) 17:40, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Copyvio from this page. An alternative version could easily be obtained. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:12, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Do Not Delete. the details of the source are fully included. it is not a high-res picture. most importantly, an alternative version can NOT be obtained for the following reasons:

1. Trinity College, Kandy has changed its visitor policy since 2010. It is very difficult to gain admittance even for an old boy with prior appointment, let alone a photographer.

2. formal photography requires permission that is usually denied, and completely disallowed within the chapel (this picture was taken from outside the open entrance).

3. an informal photo taken in the light levels of the chapel cannot be exposed for an adequate time as this picture has been, since it would require a tripod mount, which will, in turn, require a formal photo request.

4. an image search online will prove that no other images exist that show all 3 of david paynter's murals together. the subject of his murals at the trinity chapel take up an entire section of the article in question (David Paynter (artist))

hence the irreplacability of this picture.BuddhikaD (talk) 07:54, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The building appears to belong to a college. Students studying at that college can probably enter the building. Wouldn't they be able to take a replacement photo? --Stefan2 (talk) 08:57, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reply reasons 2 and 3 above cover this question adequately. if more reason is needed, the chapel is out of bounds to students except on special permission for chior practice/ religous events. on those occasions, when the pews get filled up, the two murals on the side walls are not clear. BuddhikaD (talk) 14:39, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is also the reason stated in the original post: it is only used in a gallery. This violates WP:NFG. --Stefan2 (talk) 16:09, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reply I agree that the usage is considered 'usually unacceptable' as per the regulations. however perhaps an exception could be made using the arguments above, since the guidelines for NFC in galleries states that well justified exceptions may be allowed? [NFC guide in gallery images] BuddhikaD (talk) 02:37, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:UNTITLED.png

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned image was uploaded for an Articles for Creation nomination that was turned down. Unknown copyright. Also no source or license -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 17:55, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The file links to the non-existing Template:This image was made by me. It can be freely distributed. I take it that it means that the file is an own work by the uploader. It also links to the non-existing Template:No copyright. I take it that the uploader has released it to the public ___domain. The image looks useless, so if the failed Articles for Creation nomination is deleted, I would suggest that we delete this as being out of scope. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:17, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this is clearly not untitled. 70.24.244.198 (talk) 04:20, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Silliness aside, this is a collage of drawings by several different people, and thus the uploader does not own the copyright. DS (talk) 13:34, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Locations of installations of PSQL in 2011.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I tagged this as replaceable fair use as a map always can be replaced by a free map. Later, someone changed it so that it currently says that it is both free and unfree at the same time. If unfree, it should be replaced as replaceable. If free, it needs evidence of permission, see instructions at WP:CONSENT. Stefan2 (talk) 20:14, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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