Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2013 April 14

< April 13	April 15 >

April 14

File:KneeandMMT.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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:05, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned photo of non-notable person, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bae Jae-Min. No foreseeable use. Stefan2 (talk) 00:15, 14 April 2013 (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:TekkenPlayerKnee.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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:05, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned photo of non-notable person, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bae Jae-Min. No foreseeable use. Stefan2 (talk) 00:15, 14 April 2013 (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 Expendables 2.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:11, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates MOS:FILM#Soundtrack and WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 00:20, 14 April 2013 (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:FPC.YANKTON.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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:05, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, very low quality compared to File:Yankton Federal Prison Camp 2.JPG and other Commons images of the same facility. Kelly ^hi! 01:19, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move to commons this shows a different view of the facility from the commons image. The size is also acceptable, since it the size of thumbnails and gallery views, so therefore usable. -- 70.24.250.103 (talk) 05:44, 14 April 2013 (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:Great Taste Iced Coffee.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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:05, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted product packaging not needed to demonstrate the concept of ready to drink. Kelly ^hi! 02:22, 14 April 2013 (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:Pritesh Gupta.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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:05, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'don't want this pic here anymore, seriously, what does it have to do here, I think I already deleted everything from Wikipedia. 74.77.130.82 (talk) 05:59, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Apparently author-requested; unused file with no encyclopedic value. Gobōnobō ⁺ ^c 17:01, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Unfortunately impossible to verify whether it is author-requested as the nominator didn't log in. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:47, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thus the word 'apparently' and why I didn't nominate it for deletion under G7. The image is still unused and has no evident encyclopedic value. Gobōnobō ⁺ ^c 21:08, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - It also seems to be claimed to be a photo of the uploader, so the self claim is dubious. Let's delete it since there is no use for it. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:18, 20 April 2013 (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:Foto13.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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:05, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unused image, lacking description, Blocked user. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:09, 14 April 2013 (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 voice ph.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 (ESkog)^(Talk) 15:18, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The file does not come from an official social network of The Voice of the Philippines, but from a fan made page. The uploader claims that it comes from an official source (see: alleged 'official source'). However, the official website of the show, does not list the said page. To summarize this nomination, the file is a fan-made logo and is not the official logo of the show. AR E N Z O Y 1 6A•t a l k• 10:57, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

While it is true that the logo did not came from the official facebook page, the fact is the logo is a vectorized representation of the original logo (See the official facebook page). So technically the rights still belong to ABS-CBN and Talpa. Hollyckuhno (talk) 02:48, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another thing, I did not implied that the logo came from an official source, that is why I provided the link from the fan-page. But official source or not, the fact is it is a vectorized logo of an original logo and all the rights belong to ABS-CBN and Talpa. Hollyckuhno (talk) 02:57, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Though the fan made logo may be similar to the official, it is still not the official. It would be best if we wait for the official logo.--AR E N Z O Y 1 6A•t a l k• 12:15, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't you understand my point? I already reiterated to you that the logo is a VECTORIZED FORM copied from the ORIGINAL logo. The design was already used on teasers, press conferences, and the blind audition stage in ABS-CBN Studios. Are you blind or just acting like one? I think there's no point on arguing this because I already made myself clear. Hollyckuhno (talk)

Reply. I understand that it is a vectorized form and copied from the original. But since the show has not published an official photo of it in the internet, then it is not the official logo of the show... therefore it is just a fan-made logo. I was just concern of the source of the image, not the image per se.

Again, I think it would be best to wait for the network to upload the official one. At the moment, we will have to use the image used by the show's official facebook page.--AR E N Z O Y 1 6A•t a l k• 13:54, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So theoretically, because there is no official upload of the logo yet on any official sites of the show, we will not change the logo in the article. Is that what you are implying? What if the official page per se uploaded an image of a swastica, will we put that in the Wikipedia article? The thing is the logo that I uploaded which is a fan-made was based in a logo that was already used several times on teasers, presscons, etc... That was our cue as a Wikipedians to update anything that needs an update. Hollyckuhno (talk) 14:22, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, we will not upload the logo yet since the official site has not uploaded any. However, as you know ABS-CBN, they will upload it eventually. So we cannot basically say that we will die waiting... for they will upload it eventually. For the swastica image that you have set as an example... I know they will not upload that (And if ever they will upload that, we will not use it). Yes, yes, the logo was seen in presscons, etc... but my point here is, the image you uploaded is not official one since the image comes from a fan page source. Anything not official is not official. Besides, the show has not started yet. We still have 2 months to wait for them to release it. I know you can wait for it. Just relax my friend... they will release it.--AR E N Z O Y 1 6A•t a l k• 14:49, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) In essence, that's correct. Our job is to accurately portray information we gather from sources, not to adjust those sources to suit our needs, nor to extrapolate from them to reach conclusions not otherwise stated. This has resulted in some inconsistencies in the past, but we stick to sources even if our logic, or a small leap, take us elsewhere. If the logo was officially revealed to be a swastika, then we'd have to accurately portray it as a swastika, because we provide a factual account. drewmunn talk 14:54, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reply. Thanks for the clarification Drewmunn! We can have some peace of mind now. Again Hollyckuhno, let's just wait for it. There is no harm in waiting. Okay?

--AR E N Z O Y 1 6A•t a l k• 15:04, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: Okay. Thanks. Hollyckuhno (talk) 10:16, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine! drewmunn talk 15:11, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete If The Voice of the Philippines hasn't displayed its logo publicly yet, then it fails WP:NFCC#4. If it is a fan-made logo which is not made by The Voice of the Philippines, then it fails WP:NFCC#8. For what it is worth, someone claimed that this logo is vectorised, but it uses pixel graphics (PNG), not vector graphics (SVG), so the claim about vectorisation is wrong. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:55, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: Hi, they already revealed the logo on TV plug (teasers), presscons, and on the the voice studio itself, but it seems that ABS-CBN does not intend to upload any. For the vectorization part, okay I admit my mistake. But the copyright still belongs to ABS-CBN and Talpa. Hollyckuhno (talk) 10:16, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well if you can cite its existence in any way, we may be able to do something. Even if it's not with this file, if you can find any online-accessible, reliable source, that'd be great. According to the register of trademarks, there is a logo in existence, and the official Facebook page does corroborate your story. However, because it hasn't been released officially anywhere else that I can find, it's likely that it's not finalised, and the logo may be different. drewmunn talk 10:40, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I understand. Thank you. Hollyckuhno (talk) 10:53, 18 April 2013 (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:Lambert Estes Gwinn.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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:05, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan image Pinethicket (talk) 11:00, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Redundant to File:Lambert Estes Gwinn2.jpg. Gobōnobō ⁺ ^c 22:23, 21 April 2013 (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:SANY0006.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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:05, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unusued image with minimal description, junk title. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:12, 14 April 2013 (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:MARINE DRIVE.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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:05, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unused image , lacking description. Without further information, this is just generic coastline. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:28, 14 April 2013 (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:Middle road.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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:05, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unused image lacking description, without further information this is just an image of a non-notable,generic road. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:32, 14 April 2013 (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:Zipmac.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:11, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fails NFCC#8. Screenshot with no commentary on significance. Use of multiple images in gallery on Darwine also fails NFCC#3a. NtheP (talk) 17:32, 14 April 2013 (UTC) NtheP (talk) 17:32, 14 April 2013 (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:Mspaint-darwine.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:11, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fails NFCC#8. Screenshot with no commentary on significance, not even any indication that it was generated using Darwine. Use of multiple images in gallery on Darwine also fails NFCC#3a. NtheP (talk) 17:33, 14 April 2013 (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:Silent Old Mtns in Columbus OH.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:11, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan file - redundant to File:Columbus promo.png Ronhjones ^(Talk) 19:25, 14 April 2013 (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:Windows 8.1 Build 9374 screenshot with proof of the installation setup and original signature.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 (ESkog)^(Talk) 15:21, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Per {{Non-free Microsoft screenshot}}, images may only be used of commercially-released products. Windows 8.1 is in preview and has not yet been commercially released; accordingly, the image does not meet the necessary criteria for Microsoft's permission to use the image. I hate to outright say "copyright violation", but that's about what it is. —C.Fred (talk) 19:32, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment {{Non-free Microsoft screenshot}} can only be used for commercially-released products, but {{Non-free software screenshot}} can be used for other Microsoft products, provided that the product meets WP:NFCC#4. Not sure if this is the case here. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:01, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ now that it's scaled down, but only as long as it really is being used in a way that complies with WP:FAIRUSE and WP:NFCC, particularly WP:NFCC#4 as mentioned by Stefan2. Once Windows 8.1 comes out, the section dealing with the 8.1 beta will probably be removed from Windows 8 and with it, this image. It can then be deleted as an unused non-free image. Is it possible to delete the older, larger version entirely? davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 16:55, 15 April 2013 (UTC) Updated: It must also be shown that this screen-shot exists on a non-"leaked" or, if Microsoft is in the habit of "leaking" things on purpose or even deliberately "allowing" things to be leaked for their benefit, in a likely-deliberately-leaked version (WP:NFCC#4). It must also be shown that this image either is used for commentary, which it currently is not and is too low-resolution to be used in commentary, or is used for identification, which it currently is not and is also too low-resolution to be useful. Failing this, I am in favor of deleting this image without prejudice against uploading a similar image from an officially published or unofficially but widely-beleived-to-be-deliberately "leaked" version IF such an image is CLEARLY used for commentary, identification, or similar purposes. An example would be a crop of an "About this computer" screen that clearly showed a version number, used for identification, or a crop that clearly showed a new feature and which was used to discuss the visual aspects of this feature (discussing non-visual aspects does not require an image, failing WP:NFCC#1. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 18:14, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Additional comments: I have expanded the text portion of this file to make it clear that this image may not qualify for Microsoft's licensing but that if it does not, it can be used as any other non-free image. I recommend that the community consider closing this FfD with "keep, but change license to only {{Non-free software screenshot}} and delete any non-complying versions or uses." davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 17:18, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If someone can make an argument for how this image meets NFCC #8, I'll withdraw the nomination. While I'm happy that the copyright tag situation is cleared up, I'm don't see how the image enhances readers' understanding of the software. —C.Fred (talk) 21:29, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete because:
1. This image is in violation of WP:NFCC#4 (previous publication). It is an Internet leak, which is regarded software piracy by the DMCA. Therefore, it may not even be used under U.S. fair use pretext.
2. This image is in violation of WP:NFCC#8 and WP:NFCC#1 because text alone can sufficiently replace its role – if it has any at all.

Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 06:45, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm inclined to agree with Lisa here, it adds nothing to the text of the article, and we shouldn't ignore the fact that the only way this screenshot could possibly have been produced was though illegal means. When a public beta becomes available (developer or otherwise), it may be worth adding a screenshot, but by then it'll no doubt have its own article. So, for now, I say delete. drewmunn talk 10:30, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment/mini-essay regarding leaked files in general: Sometimes companies "leak" things on purpose or "arrange" for someone else to "leak" things in a way meant to appear to be against the wishes of the company. For the purposes of WP:NFCC#4 "previous publication", an organization should not be able to say "we want this out, but we don't want Wikipedia using it" or "we want this out, but we don't want to take official responsibility for it being out" so "we'll publish this out to a select group of developers who we know can't all be trusted to keep this under wraps and we'll deliberately not take measures to find and punish those responsible for any leaks, knowing a leak will occur and that we will benefit from that leak" and avoid having WP:NFCC#4 satisfied. Now, there is a heavy burden on the person who uploads such a file to Wikipedia or who wants to keep it in a FdD discussion to convince the community that the software was indeed "published" in fact even if it appears "not published" on its face. Before any screen-shots from this particular "leak" are allowed, the uploader will need to show the community that the "leak" was a "true publication by the content owner" albeit an "un-official" one that the content owner may deny responsibility of. In these cases of known "arranged leaks," we should treat is as if it was a previously published unless a higher authority dictates otherwise. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 18:24, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
My personal experience with such 'controlled leaks' makes me think that this isn't one, as there's nothing really to note in such an early build. If there was something majorly interesting in the leak, then maybe I'd think otherwise. We have known about Blue for some time, and the leak didn't bring anything we didn't already know to some extent. Anyway, all that aside, my earlier point also still stands of it being superfluous. drewmunn talk 18:43, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. The problem with leaks are not just copyright violation but also forgery. Leaks often come from self-published primary sources. That means when you look at an alleged screenshot of leaked version, you cannot tell whether the allegation of being an actual screenshot is true. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 20:36, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We know, for instance, that this is taken from a genuinely leaked build, and that rules out forgery. However, it does mean that we are accepting goods that we know are illegally obtained through piracy, and by a user who is breaking a potentially legally binding contract with the software creator. As I've also written the discussion linked below, builds like this are likely to change radically in a matter of days, and leaks can take weeks or months to reach us, so even genuine screenshots might be shockingly inconsistent with the current version. As such, any value added by depicting it may be lost by it being outdated and contradicting new information that has come to light. drewmunn talk 21:02, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Drew. The case of the most dangerous form of forgery is not that of a totally imaginary image. (No one has a reason for even committing such an act.) The most dangerous forms are minute ones. Once upon a time in forum on the Internet, I saw a case where someone stubbornly claimed that a certain obscure error message reported EExceptionInternal599 instead of EExceptionInternal566 although we knew it was impossible. He even produced a screenshot. What we discovered later was that he had not seen the error personally and was repeating someone else who could swear to its accuracy. Mr. Someone Else set out to take a screenshot, but once he took, he discovered that it was indeed 566 and thought "I'd look like a complete fool if they find out... that is, *if* they find out!"

Suppose a Wikipedian, in the best of the faiths in the world, procures a leaked version and takes a screenshot to prove something. Pretend the distributor of the leak has altered the leaked version (for the simple reason of cracking the anti-leak measures) compromising exactly the accuracy of what is to be proved (such as the digital signature). What do we get? The sum of all that is wrong.

No! The threshold must be tight.

Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 09:57, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good point! I shall take that over to the other discussion, if you don't mind, as further argument for our proposal. If you wouldn't mind visiting that discussion and looking at the currently proposed text, that's be great as well. drewmunn talk 11:29, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Note that this discussion has started another discussion at WT:NFC#NFCC#4 - previous publication - and deliberate or engineered leaks. --Stefan2 (talk) 18:56, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It's against Microsoft's copyrighted content license: you may not use screen shots [...] from beta release products or other products that have not been commercially released. Lprd2007 (talk) 07:24, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There's an ongoing conversation regarding the power the Microsoft EULA has over us. See the link above by Stefan. drewmunn talk 08:09, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: See Talk:Windows 8#Request for "more legitimate" photo of future version. I - or since I didn't, any other editor - should have done this at the start of this discussion. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 14:53, 27 April 2013 (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 Wagon Concert (21).jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F4 by Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned personal picture with no encyclopedic value. Wgunther (talk) 19:44, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No source. See WP:CSD#F4. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:02, 14 April 2013 (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:Frank Funchess.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:11, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned personal picture which is unencyclopedic Wgunther (talk) 19:48, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Useless image. Also, it seems to say that the person on the photo also is the copyright holder, which is dubious. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:03, 14 April 2013 (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:David Steinberg, crossword editor.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F1 by ESkog (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:07, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan image, redundant to cropped version File:David Steinberg, crossword editor 2.jpg Ronhjones ^(Talk) 20:46, 14 April 2013 (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:Mahmoud Mohamed Mahmoud Abo El-Nasr.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 both (ESkog)^(Talk) 15:23, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan file, redundant to slightly edited File:Vice President for Education and Students Affaires, Misr University For Science & Technology.png Ronhjones ^(Talk) 20:56, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both It is unclear whether the uploader knows what "own work" means. I've found lots of copyright violations amongst his image uploads. --Stefan2 (talk) 18:47, 22 April 2013 (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:E-Go aircraft logo.tiff

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 - despite the unconventional description on our File page, this does appear to be the logo which the company chooses to use to identify itself. (ESkog)^(Talk) 15:25, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If File:E-plane side view 1 extended.jpg really is freely licensed as claimed, then this seems to violate WP:NFCC#1. Stefan2 (talk) 22:48, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The schematic of the fuselage has nothing to do with the licensing of this logo. WP:NFCC#1 is irrelevant because a schematic is not the equivalent of a logo. Gobōnobō ⁺ ^c 16:59, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The fair use rationale tells that this is a "computer generated image of e-Go aircraft, produced by e-Go aeroplanes". If this in fact is a logo, then the fair use rationale is faulty (meaning violation of WP:NFCC#10c) as it suggests that the image's purpose is something other than what it actually is. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:49, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - There's nothing wrong with a logo being computer generated. Gobōnobō ⁺ ^c 22:28, 21 April 2013 (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:Cape Feare Promo Card.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 by INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:11, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#8: not necessary for understanding the article. Stefan2 (talk) 23:05, 14 April 2013 (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:GI Joe PSA 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; deleted as G7 by Brendanconway (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFLISTS. This is more or less a textbook example of WP:NFC#UUI §2 although we aren't talking about music but TV series screenshots. Stefan2 (talk) 23:21, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stop All The Downloadin! - I thought this fell under WP:NFC as acceptable use but apparently not, I have no objection to deleting them all. We'll have the full story... at 11! 00:57, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just went ahead and tagged all of them G7. We'll have the full story... at 11! 01:06, 16 April 2013 (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:GI Joe PSA 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 as G7 by Brendanconway (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFLISTS. This is more or less a textbook example of WP:NFC#UUI §2 although we aren't talking about music but TV series screenshots. Stefan2 (talk) 23:21, 14 April 2013 (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:GI Joe PSA 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; deleted as G7 by Brendanconway (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFLISTS. This is more or less a textbook example of WP:NFC#UUI §2 although we aren't talking about music but TV series screenshots. Stefan2 (talk) 23:21, 14 April 2013 (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:GI Joe PSA 5.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 as G7 by Brendanconway (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFLISTS. This is more or less a textbook example of WP:NFC#UUI §2 although we aren't talking about music but TV series screenshots. Stefan2 (talk) 23:21, 14 April 2013 (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:GI Joe PSA 7.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 Brendanconway (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFLISTS. This is more or less a textbook example of WP:NFC#UUI §2 although we aren't talking about music but TV series screenshots. Stefan2 (talk) 23:21, 14 April 2013 (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:GI Joe PSA 10.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 as G7 by Brendanconway (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFLISTS. This is more or less a textbook example of WP:NFC#UUI §2 although we aren't talking about music but TV series screenshots. Stefan2 (talk) 23:22, 14 April 2013 (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:GI Joe PSA 14.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 as G7 by Brendanconway (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFLISTS. This is more or less a textbook example of WP:NFC#UUI §2 although we aren't talking about music but TV series screenshots. Stefan2 (talk) 23:22, 14 April 2013 (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:GI Joe PSA 15.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 Brendanconway (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFLISTS. This is more or less a textbook example of WP:NFC#UUI §2 although we aren't talking about music but TV series screenshots. Stefan2 (talk) 23:22, 14 April 2013 (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:GI Joe PSA 17.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 as G7 by Brendanconway (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFLISTS. This is more or less a textbook example of WP:NFC#UUI §2 although we aren't talking about music but TV series screenshots. Stefan2 (talk) 23:22, 14 April 2013 (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:GI Joe PSA 22.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 Brendanconway (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFLISTS. This is more or less a textbook example of WP:NFC#UUI §2 although we aren't talking about music but TV series screenshots. Stefan2 (talk) 23:22, 14 April 2013 (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:Alone Again, NaturaDiddly.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 by INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:11, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#8: not necessary for understanding the article. Stefan2 (talk) 23:25, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Barely any Simpsons articles have photos, and this is doing no harm. Wimpyguy (talk) 13:02, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Barely no Simpsons articles contain images simply because there barely are any images which pass WP:NFCC#8. Lots of Simpsons images were deleted last year because of the same problem as this image has. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:44, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh moan moan moan, nag nag nag. This is a terrible website. Wimpyguy (talk) 23:37, 27 April 2013 (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 Wizard of Evergreen Terrace.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:11, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#8: not necessary for understanding the article. Stefan2 (talk) 23:26, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Along with the pictures for Alone Again, Two Cars, Bart the General and Delilah. Wimpyguy (talk) 13:03, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you think that it should be kept? You haven't given any reason above. Looks like a typical WP:NFCC#8 violation. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:45, 25 April 2013 (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:Simpson and Delilah.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:11, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#8: not necessary for understanding the article. Stefan2 (talk) 23:27, 14 April 2013 (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:Two Cars on Every Garage and Three Eyes on Every Fish.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:11, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#8: not necessary for understanding the article. Stefan2 (talk) 23:27, 14 April 2013 (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:Bart the General.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:11, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#8: not necessary for understanding the article. Stefan2 (talk) 23:27, 14 April 2013 (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.