Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 December 29

< December 28	December 30 >

December 29

File:Wuhan-Guangzhou railway in Wuhan 2009.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 Rettetast (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wuhan-Guangzhou railway in Wuhan 2009.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Tuzi (notify | contribs).

No reason a free image cannot be created. ÷seresin 00:05, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above Connormah (talk) 04:25, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Wisconsin motion w.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wisconsin motion w.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by BillTunell (notify | contribs).

Replaced by File:University of Wisconsin Waving W.svg User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 04:42, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Wake Forest Demon Deacons logo.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wake Forest Demon Deacons logo.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by TarHippo (notify | contribs).

Replaced by File:Wake Forest University Athletic logo.svg User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 04:45, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Kiessling Hamburg web.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kiessling Hamburg web.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Thunderbird62 (notify | contribs).

Orphaned. SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:33, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:How To Measure a Daily Use Cane.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:How To Measure a Daily Use Cane.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Caneman1 (notify | contribs).

OR, UE, LQ, use not stated, possible CV. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 08:02, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Inweday.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Inweday.gif (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Riverguardian (notify | contribs).

OR, UE, LQ, use not stated, possible CV. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 08:02, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Islandart.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Islandart.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Nothgiel119 (notify | contribs).

OR, UE, LQ, use not stated, possible CV. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 08:02, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Jasonk.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

OR, UE, LQ, use not stated, possible CV. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 08:02, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Joanna Lumley as Mrs Peacock.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Joanna Lumley as Mrs Peacock.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Teaboi (notify | contribs).

OR, UE, LQ, use not stated, likely CV. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 08:02, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Jordanlancaster.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

OR, UE, LQ, use not stated, possible CV. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 08:02, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Keithmosher.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Keithmosher.gif (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Moshpit2 (notify | contribs).

OR, UE, LQ, use not stated, possible CV. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 08:03, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Khachaturian banner3.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Khachaturian banner3.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Shanongeorge (notify | contribs).

OR, UE, LQ, use not stated, possible CV. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 08:03, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Kim Spicer2 Headshot 31905.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kim Spicer2 Headshot 31905.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by SpicerK (notify | contribs).

OR, UE, LQ, use not stated, possible CV. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 08:03, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Lars 0098.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lars 0098.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Svada (notify | contribs).

OR, UE, LQ, use not stated FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 08:03, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Leila Russell.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Leila Russell.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Mrtenchy (notify | contribs).

OR, UE, LQ, use not stated FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 08:03, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Ljm.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

OR, UE, LQ, use not stated, possible CV. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 08:03, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Lostoppos.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lostoppos.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Billybhoy1888 (notify | contribs).

OR, UE, LQ, use not stated, possible CV. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 08:04, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Luis munet.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Luis munet.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Morales badui (notify | contribs).

OR, UE, LQ, use not stated, possible CV. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 08:04, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Kachita2.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kachita2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Oxford2008 (notify | contribs).

Appears to be a promotional image or website of some sort. Likely copyrighted. No reason given to suggest that uploader is copyright holder. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 08:06, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Pulst.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Speedy Delete per G7. MrKIA11 (talk) 17:43, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

This is a claim to own the copyright to a file officially published by http://www.utah.edu but with no suitable evidence. Images on http://www.utah.edu are under copyright and are specifically not public domain. Ash (talk) 08:43, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete the photo. I uploaded it; I was too casual in my handling of the copyrights. I'll contact the subject (Dr. Pulst) and substitute a photo without any copyright complications. Andrew Gradman ^talk/_WP:Hornbook 09:15, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:PavilionCollageJune2006.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: see Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 December 30#File:PavilionCollageJune2006.jpg. Angus McLellan (Talk) 10:33, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:PavilionCollageJune2006.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by User:Rodolph (notify | contribs).

Orphan Memphisto (talk) 13:13, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On consideration, I think this image is a blatant copyright violation - have upped it to candidates for speedy deletion. Memphisto (talk) 10:39, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:JuanoHernandez.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 ⚡ 04:02, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:JuanoHernandez.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Free alternative avalilable, and many others could be created. Damiens.rf 14:55, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Francis M. Vega.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. Photograph has no source information, authorship unknown. Although it is said that www.womensmemorial.org is federally funded, the site itself states that its photographs are "original images from the private collections of individual servicewomen, official military photographs, and photographs from other museum and archival sources" so that it cannot be assumed that photographs have a military source. The memorial or the Washington Post could presumably assist in sourcing. Angus McLellan (Talk) 10:59, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Francis M. Vega.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

No evidence this is the work of an U.S. Army soldier. Image was downloaded from Washington Post. PD images of this soldier must exist (maybe this one, if we can track the source). Damiens.rf 18:33, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep - There are various sources, besides the New York Times, there is also this one [1]. The image was taken while the subject in question was a member (employee) of the United States Military in his/her military uniform by another member (employee) of the United States Military, hence the United States Government. The copyright holder is the person who took the image which in this case was by an employee or member of the United States Military during the course of the person's official duties for a Federal institution which in this case was the United States Military. No effective transfer of copyright can be made in the U.S. for U.S. Government works, because they are not eligible for copyright protection under the U.S. Copyright Law. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:20, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Please, just add some verifiable source information in the file description page and all is done. You don't even have to vote. I'll haply withdrawn the nominations where the matter is resolved. Do that for the other files instead of repeating this vote. --Damiens.rf 23:40, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why not ask the Washington Post where the image came from ?. It seems widely used by news organizations based on the original Associated Press article. None of the sources online attribute the source but I am sure a news org will know it - Peripitus (Talk) 12:30, 3 January 2010 (UTC) - Delete after some thought - The photo was taken by someone but we clearly do not know who - Peripitus (Talk) 11:20, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The website belongs to the Memorial at Arlington National Cemetery which is a United States Federally founded memorial honoring women who have served in the United States defense in Washington. DC ., thereby PD Antonio Martin (talk) 14:09, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That is not a sustainable conclusion. Just because a site hosts an image does not mean they own it. They may be using it under fair-use provisions, may have paid for use, or may be using it gratis with permission. Do you have any proof that they own the image ? - Peripitus (Talk) 21:12, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Juan Morel Campos.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: Kept - Peripitus (Talk) 09:41, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Juan Morel Campos.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Source information is not verifiable. Image was download from some website and has since spread from Wikipedia into other ones. There should be PD pictures of this man attributable to published books. Damiens.rf 18:55, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Subject died i 1896 and image is over 100 years old. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:22, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Consider using an image that can be attributed to a reliable source. This could be a picture of my uncle. Without source information, we have to trust every uploader's word. This is not how things work here. --Damiens.rf 23:41, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- Added source. Tony the Marine (talk) 00:02, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Marine, you know you haven't donwloaded this image from there. The webiste's text is dated May 2007, and you uploaded the picture to Wikipedia in 2005. This website you linked is a text signed by some Miguel López Ortiz, and the picture is credited to "colección Miguel López Ortiz". They don't seem to care much about copyright. --Damiens.rf 01:28, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment-You know perfectly well that some of the original no longer work, it happens. You wanted a source where the image can be found, now you have one. Tony the Marine (talk) 02:07, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the reliable source: the National Foundation for Popular Culture ("under the custody of the Institute of Puerto Rican Culture"). --Jmundo (talk) 00:44, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Ryer Lake Farm.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 Materialscientist (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:07, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ryer Lake Farm.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by JonHall (notify | contribs).

Duplicate of File:Ryder_Lake_Farm.jpg (file name of this first upload was spelled incorrectly) Jonhall (talk) 18:55, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Ernesto Ramos Antonini.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

File:Ernesto Ramos Antonini.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Source information is not verifiable. Also, this licensing tag was randomly chosen. This man was 25 years old in 1923, but in the picture he looks 45 at best. Damiens.rf 18:58, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- Corrections made and reationale added. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:56, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Fair rationale added. The source is the website of the "Free School of Music" managed by the Puerto Rican Department of Education. --Jmundo (talk) 00:54, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Now that's a good example of why we shouldn't accept random websites as source. The website Marine added as a source, http://www.elmeram.org/, just copied this image from Wikipedia without even renaming the file. The file appears on the site as 100px-Ernesto_Ramos_Antonini.JPG. The "100px-" prefix is added by the MediaWiki software when the image is asked to be rendered at 100px (as it is being used in the article). The complete link for the image on Wikimedia servers is http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/7c/Ernesto_Ramos_Antonini.JPG/100px-Ernesto_Ramos_Antonini.JPG . Note also the capitilized "JPG" extension. Too much coincidence. --Damiens.rf 01:08, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Its not a "random website" but a official public school site. Yes, its too much coincidence how much time and effort you are investing to delete, comment or edit Tony's articles and uploads. --Jmundo (talk) 01:32, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note - I have updated the image page with a much better source for the original that this image is derived from http://www.flmm.org/bio_era.htm. While this is still just a copy of the film original it is as close as I can find to the real source. My spanish is poor but the page does not seem to attribute the image's creator—though the site appears quite reputable - Peripitus (Talk) 10:19, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Per updated image source. Antonio Martin (talk) 14:52, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Francisco Gonzalo Marin.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 ⚡ 12:07, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Francisco Gonzalo Marin.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Drawing downloaded from some web-hosting website (50megs.com) and claimed to be PD-Old. We can't verify this claim without a real source. Damiens.rf 18:59, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Capt Rubio.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. Absent some supporting evidence there is no way we can be confident that this is a work of the US military. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:51, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Capt Rubio.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Drawing downloaded from a fan-website claimed to be "the work of a U.S. Army soldier or employee". Without a real source, this information can not be verified. Damiens.rf 19:01, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The image was taken while the subject in question was a member (employee) of the United States Military in his/her military uniform by another member (employee) of the United States Military, hence the United States Government. The copyright holder is the person who took the image which in this case was by an employee or member of the United States Military during the course of the person's official duties for a Federal institution which in this case was the United States Military. No effective transfer of copyright can be made in the U.S. for U.S. Government works, because they are not eligible for copyright protection under the U.S. Copyright Law. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:26, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you attribute this information to a reliable source or we have to take your word for it? --Damiens.rf 13:21, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - this is a heavily digitally manipulated image—to the point that the source must be guessed. Some searching tells me that the original was b/w and that the flag has been added after (see [http://www.agifusa.org/content/euripides-rubio here and click the image to see a better size). We have zero information on the real source for this image and so it cannot be confidently stated as PD. Without a source of any repute NFCC#2 is not met. How about contacting the "American G.I. Forum National Office" via their website and asking what the source of the image they are using is ? I think they are likely to know - Peripitus (Talk) 12:36, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Eugenio Maria de Hostos.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eugenio Maria de Hostos.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Not used. Not found on source. Damiens.rf 19:03, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Sylvia Rexach.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 ⚡ 13:08, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sylvia Rexach.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Non-free image copied from some random website on the internet. Copyright status is unknown. Image is (no longer?) found on source URL. As a member of the U.S. Army, some PD images of her surely exists. Damiens.rf 19:05, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Justino diaz.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 ⚡ 13:08, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Justino diaz.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

No reason or explanation for what is this image on the public domain. Damiens.rf 19:07, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Virgilio davila.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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 13:03, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Virgilio davila.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

No reason to believe this image is in the PD. Indeed, the website http://www.prfaa.com appears to have once hosted a lot images without permission, but they have all been removed them. This one, like many others, can't be found there. Damiens.rf 19:13, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, The reason for pd is that he was mayor from 1905 to 1910. Also a strong case for a non free rationale can be written. The source is the PR Federal Affairs Administration and the upload can be verified at the web archive. --Jmundo (talk) 21:46, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Jmundo. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:29, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Concha melendez.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 ⚡ 03:01, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Concha melendez.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

No reason to believe this image is PD. It seems on more of the images once hosted (probably without permission) on prfaa.com and deleted since then. Damiens.rf 19:15, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:A M O.JPG

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. No good evidence that this is public domain and not obvious that a non-free content rationale can be constructed that will meet #3a. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:28, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:A M O.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Origin or copyright holder not-identified. Image was apparently just downloaded from the upload section of prfaa.com website, that once hosted a lot of images of actors, singers, artists, sportspeople, but no longer does so. Damiens.rf 19:17, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The image was uploaded from the PR Federal Affairs Administration and the upload can be verified here. --Jmundo (talk) 03:16, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Properly sourced, The PR Federal Affairs Administration is a department of the United States Federal Government and therefore, it's images are PD. Antonio Martin (talk) 14:56, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - it is NOT clear that this is PD as the linked website gives no source for the image. The article already has a non-free image File:O'Niell2.jpg and this extra one is unneeded - fails WP:NFCC#3a at least - Peripitus (Talk) 01:15, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Nemisio Canales.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 - The Puerto Rico Federal Affairs is reliable in establishing this as an valid image, and since all pictures of this guy are pre 1923...--Damiens.rf 23:03, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nemisio Canales.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Origin or copyright holder not-identified. Image was apparently just downloaded from the upload section of prfaa.com website, that once hosted a lot of images of actors, singers, artists, sportspeople, but no longer does so, probably out of copyright concerns. Any properly sourced image of this man would likely be in the public domain since he died at 1923. Damiens.rf 19:20, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The image was uploaded from the PR Federal Affairs Administration and the upload can be verified at the web archive.com. Really, why are we having this discussion? He died in 1923. --Jmundo (talk) 20:44, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- We needed to discuss because, without source information, we couldn't even make sure this photo was what it is thought to be. I believe the web archive may settle the matter, although a link to the page using the file instead of a link to the file itself would be better. --Damiens.rf 21:45, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - I updated the link to the page:1 --Jmundo (talk) 22:34, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - Good work!--Damiens.rf 23:03, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Puerto Rican WACs.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 - in this case I am satisfied that the link and note on the reputable linked site stating that the image is from the "National Archives" makes it almost certain that the free licence is correct - Peripitus (Talk) 01:48, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Puerto Rican WACs.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Image copied from a tribute site claimed to be the work of a U.S. Army employee. Not enough evidence to verify this claim. Damiens.rf 19:24, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep- The source is in Military Service For America Memorial Foundation, Inc. and is posted. The image was taken while the subject in question was a member (employee) of the United States Military in his/her military uniform by another member (employee) of the United States Military, hence the United States Government. The copyright holder is the person who took the image which in this case was by an employee or member of the United States Military during the course of the person's official duties for a Federal institution which in this case was the United States Military. No effective transfer of copyright can be made in the U.S. for U.S. Government works, because they are not eligible for copyright protection under the U.S. Copyright Law. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:31, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- What makes womensmemorial's images public domain? Some of the image in your link are attributed to "Women's Memorial Foundation Register", at least one is attributed to "National Archives" and other one as "handout photo by family". --Damiens.rf 01:40, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The website belongs to the Memorial at Arlington National Cemetery which is a United States Federally founded memorial honoring women who have served in the United States defense in Washington. DC ., thereby PD Antonio Martin (talk) 14:10, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Carmen Bozak2.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: http://www.womensmemorial.org/Press/highres.html shows that not all images are in the public domain. Do I think this image is an official military one? It seems likely but that's not good enough. If it is military someone will be able to get a copy direct from the archives and make the matter certain. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:40, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Carmen Bozak2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Image is claimed to be the work of a U.S. Army employee, but was copied from a tribute site. Not enough evidence to verify the PD claim. Damiens.rf 19:26, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep - The source is The University of Texas. The image was taken while the subject in question was a member (employee) of the United States Military in his/her military uniform by another member (employee) of the United States Military, hence the United States Government. The copyright holder is the person who took the image which in this case was by an employee or member of the United States Military during the course of the person's official duties for a Federal institution which in this case was the United States Military. No effective transfer of copyright can be made in the U.S. for U.S. Government works, because they are not eligible for copyright protection under the U.S. Copyright Law. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:32, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep' - The website belongs to the Memorial at Arlington National Cemetery which is a United States Federally founded memorial honoring women who have served in the United States defense in Washington. DC . Antonio Martin (talk) 14:07, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Nurses in Tortugero.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 as previous nomination. The doubt which exists here can easily be removed by obtaining the image from the archives if it truly is a military work. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:45, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nurses in Tortugero.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Image is claimed to be the work of a U.S. Army employee, but was copied from a tribute site. Not enough evidence to verify the PD claim. Damiens.rf 19:27, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep - The source is in Military Service For America Memorial Foundation, Inc] and is posted. The image was taken while the subject in question was a member (employee) of the United States Military in his/her military uniform by another member (employee) of the United States Military, hence the United States Government. The copyright holder is the person who took the image which in this case was by an employee or member of the United States Military during the course of the person's official duties for a Federal institution which in this case was the United States Military. No effective transfer of copyright can be made in the U.S. for U.S. Government works, because they are not eligible for copyright protection under the U.S. Copyright Law. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:32, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The website belongs to the Memorial at Arlington National Cemetery which is a United States Federally founded memorial honoring women who have served in the United States defense in Washington. DC ., thereby PD The interesting thing about this picture is that it is of a nurse "Company" (Platoon) taken in the Military Base Tortugero and it would be highly unlikely that a private photographer or family member would have the authority to gather all the members of said platoon for a group picture which includes the platoon commander. What I'm trying to say is that it seems to me that this a common platoon picture taken by the military. Antonio Martin (talk) 14:12, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:CarmenDurnier2.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 as previous. In this case I'd add that it would be unusual for an image from a file held by NARA or the military to have been signed with a dedication starting "To my darling...". Surely there's some Wikipedia near Washington D.C. who could get copies of photographs from the archives so that we don't have to have these sorts of pointless discussions? Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:59, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:CarmenDurnier2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Image is claimed to be the work of a U.S. Army employee, but it was copied from a tribute site. There's not enough evidence to verify the PD claim. Damiens.rf 19:28, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep - The source is Women in Service For America Memorial Foundation, Inc. and is posted, The image was taken while the subject in question was a member (employee) of the United States Military in his/her military uniform by another member (employee) of the United States Military, hence the United States Government. The copyright holder is the person who took the image which in this case was by an employee or member of the United States Military during the course of the person's official duties for a Federal institution which in this case was the United States Military. No effective transfer of copyright can be made in the U.S. for U.S. Government works, because they are not eligible for copyright protection under the U.S. Copyright Law. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:33, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The website belongs to the Memorial at Arlington National Cemetery which is a United States Federally founded memorial honoring women who have served in the United States defense in Washington. DC ., thereby PD Antonio Martin (talk) 14:13, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:RoseFranco.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: Kept (yes I know I said delete below) - Peripitus (Talk) 11:09, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:RoseFranco.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Image is claimed to be the work of a U.S. Army employee, but it was copied from a tribute site. There's not enough evidence to verify the PD claim. Damiens.rf 19:29, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep - The source is in Military Service For America Memorial Foundation, Inc. and is posted. The image was taken while the subject in question was a member (employee) of the United States Military in his/her military uniform by another member (employee) of the United States Military, hence the United States Government. The copyright holder is the person who took the image which in this case was by an employee or member of the United States Military during the course of the person's official duties for a Federal institution which in this case was the United States Military. No effective transfer of copyright can be made in the U.S. for U.S. Government works, because they are not eligible for copyright protection under the U.S. Copyright Law. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:33, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The website belongs to the Memorial at Arlington National Cemetery which is a United States Federally founded memorial honoring women who have served in the United States defense in Washington. DC ., thereby PD Antonio Martin (talk) 14:14, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the source's image notes state that the image is from the "Women's Memorial Foundation Register" whereas other images they state it is from the "National Register". I think that this image is not free, backed up by the look of a instamatic snapshot. She is still alive and was a member of the military for long enough - a free image could be found or created (this one fails WP:NFCC#1) - Peripitus (Talk) 01:56, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment per Keep - The photo is also found in the book "Wives and Warriors: Women and the Military in the United States and Canada", which credits it as a work of the United States Marine Corps, thereby PD. The file information has been updated. Tony the Marine (talk) 06:17, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I believe this is a reliable source that confirms the PD nature of the work (as a work of the United States Marine Corps). Good job. --Damiens.rf 12:29, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Lizbeth Robles.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: Kept - strong indication that the image is free—taken by another military person. I note that a more original image (here) shows here in what appears to be a military vehicle - Peripitus (Talk) 02:00, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lizbeth Robles.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Image is claimed to be the work of a U.S. Army employee, but it appears it was copied from some news site. There's not enough evidence to verify the PD claim. Damiens.rf 19:34, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep - The source is in Military Service For America Memorial Foundation, Inc. and is posted. The image was taken while the subject in question was a member (employee) of the United States Military in his/her military uniform by another member (employee) of the United States Military, hence the United States Government. The copyright holder is the person who took the image which in this case was by an employee or member of the United States Military during the course of the person's official duties for a Federal institution which in this case was the United States Military. No effective transfer of copyright can be made in the U.S. for U.S. Government works, because they are not eligible for copyright protection under the U.S. Copyright Law. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:34, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The website belongs to the Memorial at Arlington National Cemetery which is a United States Federally founded memorial honoring women who have served in the United States defense in Washington. DC ., thereby PD Antonio Martin (talk) 14:15, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Aleina Ramirez Gonzalez2.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: The result of the discussion was Keep. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 00:28, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aleina Ramirez Gonzalez2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Image is claimed to be the work of a U.S. Army employee, but it appears it was copied from some news site. There's not enough evidence to verify the PD claim. Damiens.rf 19:34, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep - Source: [2], The image was taken while the subject in question was a member (employee) of the United States Military in his/her military uniform by another member (employee) of the United States Military, hence the United States Government. The copyright holder is the person who took the image which in this case was by an employee or member of the United States Military during the course of the person's official duties for a Federal institution which in this case was the United States Military. No effective transfer of copyright can be made in the U.S. for U.S. Government works, because they are not eligible for copyright protection under the U.S. Copyright Law. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:35, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- Per obvious observation made by Marine. Antonio Martin (talk) 14:16, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - sourced to a personal website with no indication of the images source. There is no indication if this image was taken on duty or by a friend at another time. From some websearching, and given her time in the military, a free image could be found - fails WP:NFCC#1 - Peripitus (Talk) 02:05, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Maria Ines Ortiz.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 Seresin (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Maria Ines Ortiz.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Image is claimed to be the work of a U.S. Army employee, but it appears it was copied from some news site (I could not find it there). There's not enough evidence to verify the PD claim. Damiens.rf 19:35, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep - Source: Arlington National Cemetery. The image was taken while the subject in question was a member (employee) of the United States Military in his/her military uniform by another member (employee) of the United States Military, hence the United States Government. The copyright holder is the person who took the image which in this case was by an employee or member of the United States Military during the course of the person's official duties for a Federal institution which in this case was the United States Military. No effective transfer of copyright can be made in the U.S. for U.S. Government works, because they are not eligible for copyright protection under the U.S. Copyright Law. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:36, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- Arlington National Cemetery is a Federal Cemetery and website therefore is PD. Antonio Martin (talk) 14:18, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - this image is far from public domain. According to the cemetery's larger resolution version here the image is a "family photo" (and appears to be at an airport). It is not the work of a US govt employee. As a member of the military for 16 years it seems certain that there is a free image out there.. just have to find it. Can be replaced with a free alternative and so fails WP:NFCC#1 - Peripitus (Talk) 21:32, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:HectorSantiagoColon.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: Kept - It seems clear that this was created b a US soldier/employee - Peripitus (Talk) 21:24, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:HectorSantiagoColon.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Image is claimed to be the work of a U.S. Army employee, but it was copied from a tribute site. There's not enough evidence to verify the PD claim. Damiens.rf 19:35, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep - The image was taken while the subject in question was a member (employee) of the United States Military in his/her military uniform by another member (employee) of the United States Military, hence the United States Government. The copyright holder is the person who took the image which in this case was by an employee or member of the United States Military during the course of the person's official duties for a Federal institution which in this case was the United States Military. No effective transfer of copyright can be made in the U.S. for U.S. Government works, because they are not eligible for copyright protection under the U.S. Copyright Law. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:37, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per above. Antonio Martin (talk) 14:19, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:PRWWII .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 - Source was fixed and image is really PD. --Damiens.rf 13:30, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:PRWWII .jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Image is claimed to be the work of a U.S. Army employee, but the source information is so poor that it can not be checked. There's not enough evidence to verify the PD claim. Damiens.rf 19:37, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep - The source is The official Website of the United States Army. The image was taken while the subject in question was a member (employee) of the United States Military in his/her military uniform by another member (employee) of the United States Military, hence the United States Government. The copyright holder is the person who took the image which in this case was by an employee or member of the United States Military during the course of the person's official duties for a Federal institution which in this case was the United States Military. No effective transfer of copyright can be made in the U.S. for U.S. Government works, because they are not eligible for copyright protection under the U.S. Copyright Law. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:38, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Good work! --Damiens.rf 13:30, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Gen. Juan Ruis Rivera.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 Rettetast (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:06, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gen. Juan Ruis Rivera.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Incomplete source information (it just points to a website's terms of use). Almost any properly sourced image of this man would be usable since he lived before 1923. It shouldn't be hard to find an image attributable to published books. Damiens.rf 19:40, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete-Source does not work anymore, plus there is already another image of the subject. Tony the Marine (talk) 00:23, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Albizu.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: kept Graeme Bartlett (talk) 13:07, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Non-free image with no source information used in 5 different articles. Damiens.rf 19:45, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The image is PD because it was taken when young Albizu was in Harvard around the years 1913-1919 before he became the leader of several uprisings in Puerto Rico against the American government. He spent many years in prison so I doubt that this image was taken after 1923. --Jmundo (talk) 18:58, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is not enough that the image were created before 1923. It has to be published before 1923. Is there evidence of such publication? Rettetast (talk) 11:17, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the observation. Albizu was active in Harvard (1) so we can assume that the image was published at that time, but to be in the safe side the image is now only being used in one article (his biography) and a fair rationale is still available at the image description page with a proper source added by Antonio Martin. --Jmundo (talk) 15:55, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - It is now sourced. Antonio Martin (talk) 14:50, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Ricaedo Alegria.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ricaedo Alegria.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

According to the license tag use, this photo is pre-1923. If that was true, the subject would be 2 years old, but he looks 98. Also, the source information provided is invalid since it's just a link to a website's "terms of service", where the image can not really be found. Damiens.rf 19:51, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Jose Ignacio Quinton.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jose Ignacio Quinton.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

The author is not identified but it is said he died more than 100 years ago. Also, the source information provided is invalid since it's just a link to a website's "terms of service", where the image can not really be found. Damiens.rf 19:52, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- Another case where the source no longer exsists. Tony the Marine (talk) 00:42, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Myrta Silva.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 ⚡ 13:08, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Myrta Silva.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Non-free image copied from some random angelfire.com website. The origin, authorship or copyright status is not known, as required by policy. Damiens.rf 19:55, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Carmen Arroyo.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Carmen Arroyo.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Image copied from some random website tagged as pre-1923 when the subject wasn't born until 1936. Damiens.rf 19:56, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Francisco Mariano Quinones.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Francisco Mariano Quinones.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Invalid source information is just a link to a website's "terms of service", where the image can not really be found. Damiens.rf 19:57, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete-source problems. Tony the Marine (talk) 01:15, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:David Bernier.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:David Bernier.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Image copied from a random angelfire website, tagged as pre-1923, when the subject wasn't born until the end of the 1970s. Damiens.rf 19:58, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Orlando Llenza.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 ⚡ 13:08, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Orlando Llenza.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Image is claimed to be the work of a U.S. Army employee, but was copied from a tribute site. Not enough evidence to verify the PD claim. Damiens.rf 19:59, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Statue of Antonio Bernabe.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Statue of Antonio Bernabe.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Image is claimed to be the work of a U.S. Government employee, but is said to have been copied from a Puerto Rican goverment website, but it can't actually be found there anyway. Being a picture of a monument, seems easily replaceable by a user-created work. Damiens.rf 20:01, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Luis Rafael Sanchez.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 ⚡ 13:08, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Luis Rafael Sanchez.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Invalid source is just a link to some website's "terms of use" that probably never contained this image (since there's a great number of images that just point to this link as a source). Invalid license claim PD-pre-1926 when the subject wasn't born until 1936. Damiens.rf 20:07, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Piri Thomas.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 ⚡ 13:08, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Piri Thomas.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Invalid source is just a link to some website's "terms of use" that probably never contained this image (since there's a great number of images that just point to this link as a source). Invalid license claim PD-pre-1923 when the subject wasn't born until 1928. Damiens.rf 20:08, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Carmen Durnier.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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Carmen Durnier.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Not used. No source. Damiens.rf 20:10, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Noel Estrada.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. I've fiddled with the templates on the image page. Would be good if someone would sanity-check what I've done. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:00, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Noel Estrada.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Non-free image with an invalid source,which is just a link to some website's "terms of use" that probably never contained this image (since there's a great number of images that just point to this link as a source). Damiens.rf 20:11, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - correct source is http://www.prpop.org/noticias/dic04/noel_estrada_dic04.shtml and has been added to the image page. I think that the assertion that this is a promotional image is probably correct and I don't think we have an NFCC#2 problem. - Peripitus (Talk) 11:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per above. Antonio Martin (talk) 14:21, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Jesus Maria Sanroma.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 ⚡ 13:08, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jesus Maria Sanroma.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Source information is just a broken link to what once may have been a gif file hosted in some site. There's not enough information to verify this image is really pre-1923 as claimed (the subject would be just 21 years old). Judging by the uploader's poor use of the PD-1923 (see nominations above), this tag was probably just thrown in the file. Damiens.rf 20:16, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:MargotArce.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. Source site is a respectable educational resource as Jmundo notes. It would be nice if someone could contact them and ask for more information on this picture but I don't see that as being essential. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:05, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:MargotArce.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Non-free image with unknown copyright holder, author or copyright status. Was just copied from a tribute website (we have a stricter instance about copyrights). Damiens.rf 20:18, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The source is not a tribute site but an online encyclopedia endorsed by the Puerto Rican Department of Education. --Jmundo (talk) 03:25, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Acosta.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 ⚡ 13:08, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Acosta.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Marine 69-71 (notify | contribs).

Non-free image with no source/author/copyright information, just a link to a website's "terms of service", where the image can not really be found. Damiens.rf 20:20, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Rascal Flatts - Bless the Broken Road.ogg

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 ⚡ 07:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rascal Flatts - Bless the Broken Road.ogg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Esprit15d (notify | contribs).

Doesn't add to understanding of song, as the song's content is not discussed in the article itself. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 21:12, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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