Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 April 30

< April 29	May 1 >

April 30

File:Admiral Jerauld Wright Warrior Among Diplomats.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 VernoWhitney (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free book cover used to decorate the references section of an article. Damiens.rf 00:36, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Sven Manguard Wha? 07:41, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete agree being used for decoration. MilborneOne (talk) 18:38, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment What is the source of the image in the center? If it is PD, then I think the argument could be made that the entire image is PD since an additional phrase and an author's name do not make something copyrightable. — BQZip01 — ^talk 19:46, 6 May 2011 (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:Ron Ely-Doc Savage.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 VernoWhitney (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decorative non-free screenshot. Damiens.rf 00:39, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Sven Manguard Wha? 07:42, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete agree with nom one of many non-free images in article. MilborneOne (talk) 18:42, 1 May 2011 (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:Doc0349.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 VernoWhitney (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decorative non-free screenshot. It's not clear what's exactly the benefit to the readeer in seeing this specific still from the movie. Damiens.rf 00:40, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Less clear cut than the other two, but still, delete per nom. Sven Manguard Wha? 07:43, 30 April 2011 (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:Ronely13.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 VernoWhitney (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free image of a living guy. Damiens.rf 00:44, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Also, image of a movie being used to illustrate actor. Sven Manguard Wha? 07:44, 30 April 2011 (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:Cintalaura2.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 F9 by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:16, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Watermark of copyright holder is clearly visible in photo. Source of image: http://www.kapanlagi.com/foto/selebriti/indonesia/c/cinta_laura/641.html Caption below translates to: "Copyright reserved. Prohibited use photos in any form without written permission from KapanLagi.com" (according to Google translate from Indonesian) "Alex Neman" is 12 according to their own User page, maybe the website does employ 12 year old photographers for their news reports. Can be discussed, "site:kapanlagi.com alex neman" does not yield any results in Google. Fixer23 (talk) 02:19, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Looks like a pretty clear case of image theft to me. Sven Manguard Wha? 07:47, 30 April 2011 (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 Show.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: Withdrawn Sven Manguard Wha? 07:53, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with NFCC Rule #8. The additional cover is decorative and trivial. There are no mentions in the article of it. I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 03:11, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawing Nomination. I see the significance now. I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 04:19, 30 April 2011 (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:Washington Monument.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 Zscout370 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:15, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly corrupted file, displays the error message: Error creating thumbnail: Invalid thumbnail parameters Acather96 (talk) 06:10, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the file page says that it cannot create a thumbnail because the image is too big. If I view the original file on my computer, it displays just fine. This image is 4,288px × 3,216px PNG file, having 13 790 208 pixels. The complete error message is Error creating thumbnail: Invalid thumbnail parameters or image file with more than 12.5 million pixels. You will note that this file has more than 12.5 million pixels, which you neglected to check, or enter the full error message for us to read. 65.94.45.160 (talk) 06:16, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Move to commons license is compatible. Perhaps Wikimedia will be upgraded to support such large images. 65.94.45.160 (talk) 06:16, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will try and see if I can have it changed to a jpeg image. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 06:58, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Washington_Monument_test.jpg. It is a far away shot of the monument with a sunset. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 07:00, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Still won't work. Recommend that the image size be reduced to 3500x3500 (square root of 12.5 mil is 3535.53) Sven Manguard Wha? 08:03, 30 April 2011 (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:Jerry's Painting.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 Article and FUR have been substantially reworked which appears to address the concerns of the nominator. No prejudice against a speedy relist if this is not in fact the case.

Non-free TV episode illustration, used in infobox, apparently showing a painting that may be part of the episode action. No explanation what role the painting plays, no apparent need to see the painting to understand the article as long as the article doesn't even talk about it. Article is a mere sub-stub without even a plot summary, let alone analytical commentary on anything. Fails NFCC#8 unless article gets substantially reworked. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:16, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Useless image (from a useless show, but that's a separate point.) Sven Manguard Wha? 08:38, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I didn't upload this image, but I plan to work on improving the article. I can safely say that this painting is a focal point of the episode, and thus will be a major part of the critical commentary of the article. Thus I think it falls under the fair use criteria for non-free images. Once I update the article, I will also update the image's fair use rationale to reflect this. (Also, the image needs to be reduced to a lower-resolution.) Once these things are addressed, I think it's appropriate to keep this image. — Hun ter Ka hn 03:31, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- OK, I have not finished my expansion of this article, but I have added a fair use rationale to the image description that I believes justifies its inclusion per WP:FUC. I've also appropriately reduced the resolution of the image. — Hun ter Ka hn 15:04, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Since there have been no additional arguments for deletion since the article was expanded, the fair use rationale was updated and the image was reduced in resolution, can we now end this debate and keep the images? — Hun ter Ka hn 13:40, 9 May 2011 (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:Fiba Asia Champions Cup 2011 group draw.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 VernoWhitney (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free photograph or screenshot of four living public figures during a recent public event which can easily be understood without its visual presence. Not the object of analytic commentary. Replaceable as to the function of showing the persons in question, and fails NFCC#8 with respect to the function of explaining the event. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:41, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:47, 30 April 2011 (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:Clint Walker - More Dead Than Alive.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 VernoWhitney (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The use does not significantly increase reader understanding as required by WP:NFCC#8 The text in the film article describing the role is perfectly understandable without being illustrated by the screenshot. In the bio, the text of which doesn’t even mention the role of Clint, the screenshot (apparently) is used only to decorate a filmography. —teb728 t c 09:35, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Extraneous, fails NFCC#8. Sven Manguard Wha? 00:52, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The image has been re-purposed as the infobox image for the Clint Walker article, and the image has been dropped from the More Dead Than Alive article. In this new configuration, it meets WP:NFCC#8. The image in question is a cropped screenshot which was located after undertaking the following the availability of a free image of Clint Walker using the Google search engine.

Using the label for commercial reuse with modeifcation useage rights filter, here are the results: None
Using the labeled for reuse with modification useage rights filter, here are the results: None
Using the labeled for commercial reuse useage rights filter, here are the results: None
Using the labeled for reuse rights filter, here are the results: None
Using not filtered by license rights filter, here are the results: 54,900 results

I selected this image because it was a screenshot, and I further cropped the image using SnagIt. In its new configuration as the infobox image for the Clint Walker article, the image meets WP:NFCC#8. Marcd30319 (talk) 18:16, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For that use it fails WP:NFCC#1: He is a living person; so a free replacement could be made to show how he looks. —teb728 t c 18:26, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where, pray tell? It is pretty easy to evoke WP:NFCC#1, but how about some suggestions than to simply say "free replacement could be made to show how he looks." Like what? Dazzle me. Marcd30319 (talk) 23:33, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You or someone else could go to the place where he lives, take a snapshot of him when he comes out of his home, and release it under a free license. —teb728 t c 00:41, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gee, that never occurred to me. If only I lived on the other side of the country, and somehow taking a snapshot of an 84-year-old man is the best substituite for commentary about the acting roles that he did a half century ago. I guess we could wait him out, but isn't this ghoulish. BTW - where in WP:NFCC#1 is there an explicit phohibition of using non-free image of a living person? Marcd30319 (talk) 11:32, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The explicit prohibition is on using any non-free image where a free equivalent could be created that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose. A non-free image of a living person might be used 1) if for some extrordinary reason (like maybe the person is a recluse or is imprisoned for life with no possibility of parole) no one could take a free photo, or 2) if the free equivalent would not serve the same encyclopedic purpose (implying the purpose is something other than showing what the person looks like). The encyclopedic purpose of the infobox image of a biography is to identify the article by showing what the subject looks like. —teb728 t c 21:54, 6 May 2011 (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:Album Glare frontcover.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: Speedy Deleted per CSD F1 Sven Manguard Wha? 01:27, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Obsolete file. Article's infobox didn't update with the new version, so I uploaded it with another name Vegetable man38 (talk · contribs) 12:43, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't believe it at first, I thought you just forgot to clear your cache, sure enough though, this is a glitch. I CSDed it as a redundant file. Sven Manguard Wha? 01:10, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I got someone to delete that file. It took a bit of explaining, neither of us have seen anything like that before. Ah well. Cheers. Sven Manguard Wha? 01:27, 1 May 2011 (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:Numberones.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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons. Please nominate it for deletion there if you still feel it should be deleted. AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:18, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Original Research? 90.197.91.105 (talk) 15:01, 30 April 2011 (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:Kingsroad.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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:09, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free TV episode screenshot, used in infobox. Apparently random, nondescript scene, not embedded in analytical commentary, scene appears to be not even mentioned in article; no explanation how this frame either is necessary to understand any specific point in the article, or of particular value to visually "identify" the episode (as claimed in the boilerplate FUR). Fails NFCC#8. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:05, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I selected this frame because I felt that it might illustrate the "traveling" nature of the episode, that happens with most of their protagonists going from one location to the other.--RR (talk) 17:37, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Addendum: By nature, no image from a tv episode is free. I wonder then which would be the critteria for choosing which episodes can have an image and which ones don't, and if they can, which caption would be alright. An iconic moment of the episode? An image than encapsules its main theme? A scene that is referenced in the text?--RR (talk) 19:51, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Answer is: an image that is necessary for understanding either some significant, explicitly discussed, sourced issue of critical commentary contained in the article, or for understanding some crucial element of the plot that couldn't be understood without the visual support. Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:48, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Is this a general suggestion or a mandatory requirement? I'm asking this because when writting the article I was trying to base it on the episode articles that are listed as "exemplary" in the WP:MOSFICT, all of them featured articles. As I see it, the captions included in, say, Homer's Enemy, Hell Is Other Robots, The Other Woman or the others are not needed for "understanding" any part of the critical commentary or the plot. Although I'm far from being an expert on the matter, I'll vote keep since it is my understanding that a single caption of a moment representative of a whole episode qualifies as a "fair use". However, I'll add some more explanation in the rationale in the hopes it satisfies you.--RR (talk) 12:08, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Nothing particularly compelling about this image. Not every article needs an image, especially when there are no free images to be had. Sven Manguard Wha? 04:07, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per the reasons stated above.--RR (talk) 12:08, 5 May 2011 (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:Saudi Ministry of Foreign Affairs building.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 G7 by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 00:00, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(Self-nom) Unable to provide enough fair use info. Yk (talk | contrib) 20:43, 30 April 2011 (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:Gemma Hasson 1975.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 VernoWhitney (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

poor source, no author established (image taken from ebay ?) image of a living person. We can't host randomly webscraped images of living people for many reasons (see WP:NFC in a few places) Peripitus (Talk) 22:15, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Sorry, I was rather evasive about the source. I added a more reliable info with a link: Taken from eBay. Photo coming with original Looking for the Morning LP. See here. Regarding LP credits, photos are credited to Ronnie Norton. --Vegetable man38 (talk · contribs) 22:55, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unless there is a compelling reason (see for the unacceptable use section of WP:NFC for more information) we do not host non-free images of living people as it is deemed that a free image could be created (or could indeed exist). - Peripitus (Talk) 00:16, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If I refer to Wikipedia:NFC#Images 2 "However, for some retired or disbanded groups, or retired individuals whose notability rests in large part on their earlier visual appearance, a new picture may not serve the same purpose as an image taken during their career, in which case the use would be acceptable." Gemma Hasson is retired and has not performed for almost 20 years (the last witnessing of her carreer is a 1990 tv concert). Moreover, the photo I used is the only one I've ever seen (in 2 years researches) from her, excepting the ones on her albums covers.Vegetable man38 (talk · contribs) 01:24, 7 May 2011 (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.