Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 March 5

< March 4	March 6 >

March 5

File:MumsOnline Header.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:23, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Mumss camera pic tures 026.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:23, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Tulips2007paris.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Low quality Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:25, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Mumv.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, copyvio Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:26, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:MumandDadWedding.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Low quality Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:29, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Mulatto Woman 1861.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, worse-quality version of File:Boyce Joanna Mrs. Edwards.jpg Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:43, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Multi-Image workflow.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, unclear encyclopedic value (no source - original research?) Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:51, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:MultiBuildingManagementCenter -BrightCore.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, unclear encyclopedic value, no stated source Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:53, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Structure and operation brightcore.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, undescribed, unclear encyclopedic value, could be recreated if needed Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:53, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:LonBrightNode.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, unclear encyclopedic value (may relate to BrightCore), could be recreated if needed Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:54, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Modbus BrightNode.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, unclear encyclopedic value (may relate to BrightCore), could be recreated if needed Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:54, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:DemonstrationSytem - BrightCore.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, unclear encyclopedic value (may relate to BrightCore), could be recreated if needed Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:55, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:MultiCam.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, fabric designs can be copyrighted, and this looks creative enough to be copyrightable. a wikipedian could make a freely-licensed camo print instead. Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:55, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Set-mundu.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, no stated source, user's other uploads are copyvios Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:58, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Mundkurganapa.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Low quality Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:59, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code no colour3528f.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:42, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code no colour3750f.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:42, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code no colour3652f.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:43, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code no colour3650f.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:43, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code no colour3523.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:43, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code no colour3529.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:43, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code no colour3521.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:43, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code black41.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:44, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code darkgreen75.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:44, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code darkgreen84.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:44, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code darkgreen72.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:44, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code brown89.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:44, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code brown62.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:44, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code brown60.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:44, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code brown58.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:45, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code black3650.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:45, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code black3652.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:45, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code black83.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:45, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code black43.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:45, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code Red50.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:45, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:BLACK50.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:45, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code Red50.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:45, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code green60.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:46, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code green61.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:46, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code green62.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:46, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code green63.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:46, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code green64.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:47, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code black40.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:47, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code black45.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:47, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code red51.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:47, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code red52.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:47, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code red53.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:47, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code red54.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:47, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Unit code darkgreen92.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, without useful description therefore useless Bulwersator (talk) 07:44, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Once More with Feeling- Singles 1996–2004 CD-DVD front cover.jpeg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3: excessive use of fair use images and too high resolution. Stefan2 (talk) 14:40, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: the same artwork of the CD cover. Quite useless. Cavarrone (talk) 15:08, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Once More with Feeling- Singles 1996–2004 DVD front cover.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3: excessive use of fair use images and too high resolution. Stefan2 (talk) 14:41, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this cover is different and alternative to the CD cover, and the two images dispay different products (the DVD and the CD). A second image is not excessive use of fair image if it is justified, as in this case. Cavarrone (talk) 15:17, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The significance of the different cover isn't discussed in the article, so it fails WP:NFCC#8. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:36, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Special Needs 7" vinyl front cover.jpeg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3: excessive use of fair use images and too high resolution. Stefan2 (talk) 14:44, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Special Needs DVD front cover.jpeg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3: excessive use of fair use images and too high resolution. Stefan2 (talk) 14:48, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Every Day Should Be a Holiday 1998 version front cover.jpeg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3: excessive use of fair use images. Stefan2 (talk) 14:55, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Seventh Dream of Teenage Heaven 2000 reissue front cover.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3: excessive use of fair use images and too high resolution. Stefan2 (talk) 14:56, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:We Used to Be Friends DVD front cover.jpeg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3: excessive use of fair use images and too high resolution. Stefan2 (talk) 15:01, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:You Were the Last High.jpeg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#1: is replaceable by File:You Were the Last High CD2 front cover.jpeg which is ineligible for copyright. Stefan2 (talk) 15:02, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Get Off (The Dandy Warhols song) CD2 front cover.jpeg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3: excessive use of fair use images and too high resolution. Stefan2 (talk) 15:02, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Boys Better CD2 front cover.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3: excessive use of fair use images and too high resolution. Stefan2 (talk) 15:03, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:AdamandtheAntsDirkWearsWhiteSox.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: No Consensus. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 02:04, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3: excessive use of non-free images. Stefan2 (talk) 15:06, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is not excessive at all. It illustrates the album cover from the re-release, which is completely different to the cover of the original release.--Michig (talk) 17:53, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The significance of the different cover isn't discussed in the article, so it fails WP:NFCC#8. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:37, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The album was reissued in a different format several years after its original release with a completely different sleeve. The additional image increases readers' understanding of the different versions of the albums, thus passing criterion 8.--Michig (talk) 12:29, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The significance of the second cover being different isn't critically discussed in the article. Compare with the article Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937 film): an old film for which there are plenty of different film posters, DVD covers, VHS covers and other kinds of posters and covers. Yet, only one of them is included in the article, with a single screenshot from the film further down. --Stefan2 (talk) 19:09, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The cover from the 1983 version being different is discussed in the article. There are exactly two images that identify the different versions of this album. Not comparable at all to Snow White. This is the sleeve from a different version of the album, with different tracks.--Michig (talk) 20:47, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Elgin Avenue Breakdown Revisited.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3: excessive use of fair use images. Stefan2 (talk) 15:04, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Live at CBGB Theatre, New York - July 18th 1978 front cover.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3: excessive use of non-free images. Stefan2 (talk) 15:08, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:The dandy warhols bohemian like you (front) - Re-Release.JPG

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3: excessive use of non-free images and too high resolution. Stefan2 (talk) 15:09, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Bohemian Like You Australian Tour EP front cover.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3: excessive use of non-free images and too high resolution. Stefan2 (talk) 15:09, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Bohemian Like You CD2 front cover.jpeg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3: excessive use of non-free images. Stefan2 (talk) 15:10, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

...on Earth? LF (talk) 01:44, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Machine Gun Fellatio - Paging Mr. Strike - 2nd Page for Mr. Strike Coverart.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3: excessive use of non-free images. Stefan2 (talk) 15:29, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have no problem with the proposed deletion. It clearly is excessive and gives no extra value to the article. Salavat (talk) 11:45, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:US 30 and 5th Avenue in Chicago Heights, Illinois.JPG

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned local version of Commons file. Kelly ^hi! 16:25, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:PaceOrionVI.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan, low resolution. Kelly ^hi! 16:54, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Logoshoepediageniuscopy copy.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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OR, LQ, no encyc use foreseen Skier Dude (talk) 17:57, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Gorbalwheelchair.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OR, UE, no encyc use Skier Dude (talk) 18:00, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Gorbalsgroup2.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OR, UE, no encyc use Skier Dude (talk) 18:00, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Keith Barry 2.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free photo of a person who is still alive. Stefan2 (talk) 19:25, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't delete this image, because this is a non-free media information and use rationale for Keith Barry article see photo licensing. Ramesh Ramaiah^talk 21:09, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

He is still alive, so you will have to wait until he dies before you can upload any non-free photos of him. See WP:NFC#UUI §1. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:34, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Teddy bear 1111111.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Useless user photo. Additionally: "photo by: S.F.", uploaded as own work by User:Inthenameofgod, possibly copyvio because of toy policy. Stefan2 (talk) 22:09, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Micopix 029.JPG

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused user photo, I suppose. Stefan2 (talk) 22:34, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Mico.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused user photo or copyvio (see watermark). Stefan2 (talk) 22:35, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Mark-Abel.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free photo of a person who is still alive. Stefan2 (talk) 23:37, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't delete this image. A permissions email has been sent to the Wikipedia Permissions folks via the address provided on my talk page. The copyright holder himself has given the permission (actually requested it be used) for this image to be used on the post. DWestThunderFrog (talk) 21:22, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - @DWestThunderFrog, you could have avoided this nomination. If a permit of useage was sent to "OTRS" by the copyright holder, then you should have edited the image file and added the following template: {{OTRS-pending}}. Now, mind you, if within a reasonable period of time "OTRS" does not receive the permit of useage or for some reason does not grant the image a "permit", the image in question will then be subject to deletion once more. Tony the Marine (talk) 04:23, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There is also the issue that the file information page doesn't specify any free licence. If none is specified in the e-mail, the image will have to be deleted as replaceable fair use. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:27, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:LIVE RR LittleBook.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NFC#UUI §2: CD covers as part of a discography are disallowed. This is a similar situation: lots of non-free book covers in a list of books. Stefan2 (talk) 23:45, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

STRONG KEEP. This is not a "random assembly" of book covers, or merely a "list of books." This specific book was edited by the subject of this Wikipedia article. The book cover is a clear and specific way to illustrate the book, which the subject edited.

Also, this is a book cover of a published hardcover book. The publisher who owns the copyright is not harmed or damaged in any way by the use of this image. In fact, since the publisher wants to sell its books, the publisher benefits from the inclusion of this image.

The significance of this precise book is discussed in the article itself, and numerous in-line citations are also provided.

In addition, the image is not being used in a promotional manner, and does not tarnish or compromise the underlying product. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 00:02, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, images of CD covers in a discography are not a "random assembly" of CD covers, or merely a "list of CDs." Those specific CDs are made by the subject of a single Wikipedia article, but images of them are still not allowed in a discography. This is exactly the same situation. --Stefan2 (talk) 00:14, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding WP:NFC#UUI, please note that WP:NFC#UUI defines the following as an allowable use:

Cover art: Cover art from various items, for visual identification only in the context of critical commentary of that item (not for identification without critical commentary).

This is precisely the way this photo was used in this article, with critical commentary, newspaper reviews, and in-line citations about this specific book. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 01:07, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Compare with the article Walt Disney Classics which is not allowed to contain non-free photos of all of the films discussed in it. What is the difference between that article and the way you're using the image in this article? --Stefan2 (talk) 01:46, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stefan2, that is a good question because it precisely illustrates the point, and precisely demonstrates what WP:NFC#UUI is saying. If you read through the Walt Disney Classics article, you will see that there is no critical commentary, merely a recitation of box office statistics. However this photo that was nominated, relates to a book that was discussed with critical commentary, newspaper references, and in-line citations.

The Walt Disney photos fail under the WP:NFC#UUI "critical commentary" standard. This photo meets that standard.

I'm glad you brought up this point, because it helps to illustrate the policy rationale for this photo. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 02:21, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But if you read through this article, you will notice that there is even less critical commentary: the article only lists a few works and mentions some things related to them. --Stefan2 (talk) 19:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stefan2, please do not be offended by this - but what you are saying is not true, and does not make sense. The Walt Disney photos had zero critical commentary related to them. That is why they failed the WP:NFC#UUI "critical commentary" standard.

But this photo was accompanied by newspaper articles, direct quotes to those news articles, and in-line citations to those news articles, all of which dealt with the book associated with this specific photo. So this photo was accompanied by much more critical commentary than the Walt Disney article which you mentioned. The Disney article had no critical commentary, but merely a recitation of box office statistics. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 20:34, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Leibowitz.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NFC#UUI §2: CD covers as part of a discography are disallowed. This is a similar situation: lots of non-free book covers in a list of books. Stefan2 (talk) 23:45, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

STRONG KEEP. This is not a "random assembly" of book covers, or merely a "list of books." This specific book was edited by the subject of this Wikipedia article. The book cover is a clear and specific way to illustrate the book, which the subject edited.

Also, this is a book cover of a published hardcover book. The publisher who owns the copyright is not harmed or damaged in any way by the use of this image. In fact, since the publisher wants to sell its books, the publisher benefits from the inclusion of this image.

The significance of this precise book is discussed in the article itself, and numerous in-line citations are also provided.

In addition, the image is not being used in a promotional manner, and does not tarnish or compromise the underlying product. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 00:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, images of CD covers in a discography are not a "random assembly" of CD covers, or merely a "list of CDs." Those specific CDs are made by the subject of a single Wikipedia article, but images of them are still not allowed in a discography. This is exactly the same situation. --Stefan2 (talk) 00:14, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding WP:NFC#UUI, please note that WP:NFC#UUI defines the following as an allowable use:

Cover art: Cover art from various items, for visual identification only in the context of critical commentary of that item (not for identification without critical commentary).

This is precisely the way this photo was used in this article, with critical commentary, newspaper reviews, and in-line citations about this specific book. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 01:08, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Compare with the article Walt Disney Classics which is not allowed to contain non-free photos of all of the films discussed in it. What is the difference between that article and the way you're using the image in this article? --Stefan2 (talk) 01:46, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stefan2, that is a good question because it precisely illustrates the point, and precisely demonstrates what WP:NFC#UUI is saying. If you read through the Walt Disney Classics article, you will see that there is no critical commentary, merely a recitation of box office statistics. However this photo that was nominated, relates to a book that was discussed with critical commentary, newspaper references, and in-line citations.

The Walt Disney photos fail under the WP:NFC#UUI "critical commentary" standard. This photo meets that standard.

I'm glad you brought up this point, because it helps to illustrate the policy rationale for this photo. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 02:21, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But if you read through this article, you will notice that there is even less critical commentary: the article only lists a few works and mentions some things related to them. --Stefan2 (talk) 19:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stefan2, please do not be offended by this - but what you are saying is not true, and does not make sense. The Walt Disney photos had zero critical commentary related to them. That is why they failed the WP:NFC#UUI "critical commentary" standard.

But this photo was accompanied by newspaper articles, direct quotes to those news articles, and in-line citations to those news articles, all of which dealt with the book associated with this specific photo. So this photo was accompanied by much more critical commentary than the Walt Disney article which you mentioned. The Disney article had no critical commentary, but merely a recitation of box office statistics. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 20:34, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Roomftd.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NFC#UUI §2: CD covers as part of a discography are disallowed. This is a similar situation: lots of non-free book covers in a list of books. Stefan2 (talk) 23:45, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

STRONG KEEP. This is not a "random assembly" of book covers, or merely a "list of books." This specific book was edited by the subject of this Wikipedia article. The book cover is a clear and specific way to illustrate the book, which the subject edited.

Also, this is a book cover of a published hardcover book. The publisher who owns the copyright is not harmed or damaged in any way by the use of this image. In fact, since the publisher wants to sell its books, the publisher benefits from the inclusion of this image.

The significance of this precise book is discussed in the article itself, and numerous in-line citations are also provided.

In addition, the image is not being used in a promotional manner, and does not tarnish or compromise the underlying product. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 00:06, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, images of CD covers in a discography are not a "random assembly" of CD covers, or merely a "list of CDs." Those specific CDs are made by the subject of a single Wikipedia article, but images of them are still not allowed in a discography. This is exactly the same situation. --Stefan2 (talk) 00:14, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding WP:NFC#UUI, please note that WP:NFC#UUI defines the following as an allowable use:

Cover art: Cover art from various items, for visual identification only in the context of critical commentary of that item (not for identification without critical commentary).

This is precisely the way this photo was used in this article, with critical commentary, newspaper reviews, and in-line citations about this specific book. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 01:09, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Compare with the article Walt Disney Classics which is not allowed to contain non-free photos of all of the films discussed in it. What is the difference between that article and the way you're using the image in this article? --Stefan2 (talk) 01:46, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stefan2, that is a good question because it precisely illustrates the point, and precisely demonstrates what WP:NFC#UUI is saying. If you read through the Walt Disney Classics article, you will see that there is no critical commentary, merely a recitation of box office statistics. However this photo that was nominated, relates to a book that was discussed with critical commentary, newspaper references, and in-line citations.

The Walt Disney photos fail under the WP:NFC#UUI "critical commentary" standard. This photo meets that standard.

I'm glad you brought up this point, because it helps to illustrate the policy rationale for this photo. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 02:22, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But if you read through this article, you will notice that there is even less critical commentary: the article only lists a few works and mentions some things related to them. --Stefan2 (talk) 19:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stefan2, please do not be offended by this - but what you are saying is not true, and does not make sense. The Walt Disney photos had zero critical commentary related to them. That is why they failed the WP:NFC#UUI "critical commentary" standard.

But this photo was accompanied by newspaper articles, direct quotes to those news articles, and in-line citations to those news articles, all of which dealt with the book associated with this specific photo. So this photo was accompanied by much more critical commentary than the Walt Disney article which you mentioned. The Disney article had no critical commentary, but merely a recitation of box office statistics. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 20:35, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Farm&m.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NFC#UUI §2: CD covers as part of a discography are disallowed. This is a similar situation: lots of non-free book covers in a list of books. Stefan2 (talk) 23:46, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

STRONG KEEP. This is not a "random assembly" of book covers, or merely a "list of books." This specific book was edited by the subject of this Wikipedia article. The book cover is a clear and specific way to illustrate the book, which the subject edited.

Also, this is a book cover of a published hardcover book. The publisher who owns the copyright is not harmed or damaged in any way by the use of this image. In fact, since the publisher wants to sell its books, the publisher benefits from the inclusion of this image.

The significance of this precise book is discussed in the article itself, and numerous in-line citations are also provided.

In addition, the image is not being used in a promotional manner, and does not tarnish or compromise the underlying product. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 00:07, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, images of CD covers in a discography are not a "random assembly" of CD covers, or merely a "list of CDs." Those specific CDs are made by the subject of a single Wikipedia article, but images of them are still not allowed in a discography. This is exactly the same situation. --Stefan2 (talk) 00:14, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding WP:NFC#UUI, please note that WP:NFC#UUI defines the following as an allowable use:

Cover art: Cover art from various items, for visual identification only in the context of critical commentary of that item (not for identification without critical commentary).

This is precisely the way this photo was used in this article, with critical commentary, newspaper reviews, and in-line citations about this specific book. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 01:12, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Compare with the article Walt Disney Classics which is not allowed to contain non-free photos of all of the films discussed in it. What is the difference between that article and the way you're using the image in this article? --Stefan2 (talk) 01:46, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stefan2, that is a good question because it precisely illustrates the point, and precisely demonstrates what WP:NFC#UUI is saying. If you read through the Walt Disney Classics article, you will see that there is no critical commentary, merely a recitation of box office statistics. However this photo that was nominated, relates to a book that was discussed with critical commentary, newspaper references, and in-line citations.

The Walt Disney photos fail under the WP:NFC#UUI "critical commentary" standard. This photo meets that standard.

I'm glad you brought up this point, because it helps to illustrate the policy rationale for this photo. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 02:22, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But if you read through this article, you will notice that there is even less critical commentary: the article only lists a few works and mentions some things related to them. --Stefan2 (talk) 19:02, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stefan2, please do not be offended by this - but what you are saying is not true, and does not make sense. The Walt Disney photos had zero critical commentary related to them. That is why they failed the WP:NFC#UUI "critical commentary" standard.

But this photo was accompanied by newspaper articles, direct quotes to those news articles, and in-line citations to those news articles, all of which dealt with the book associated with this specific photo. So this photo was accompanied by much more critical commentary than the Walt Disney article which you mentioned. The Disney article had no critical commentary, but merely a recitation of box office statistics. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 20:36, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Be a road.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NFC#UUI §2: CD covers as part of a discography are disallowed. This is a similar situation: lots of non-free book covers in a list of books. Stefan2 (talk) 23:46, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

STRONG KEEP. This is not a "random assembly" of book covers, or merely a "list of books." This specific book was edited by the subject of this Wikipedia article. The book cover is a clear and specific way to illustrate the book, which the subject edited.

Also, this is a book cover of a published hardcover book. The publisher who owns the copyright is not harmed or damaged in any way by the use of this image. In fact, since the publisher wants to sell its books, the publisher benefits from the inclusion of this image.

The significance of this precise book is discussed in the article itself, and numerous in-line citations are also provided.

In addition, the image is not being used in a promotional manner, and does not tarnish or compromise the underlying product. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 00:08, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, images of CD covers in a discography are not a "random assembly" of CD covers, or merely a "list of CDs." Those specific CDs are made by the subject of a single Wikipedia article, but images of them are still not allowed in a discography. This is exactly the same situation. --Stefan2 (talk) 00:14, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding WP:NFC#UUI, please note that WP:NFC#UUI defines the following as an allowable use:

Cover art: Cover art from various items, for visual identification only in the context of critical commentary of that item (not for identification without critical commentary).

This is precisely the way this photo was used in this article, with critical commentary, newspaper reviews, and in-line citations about this specific book. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 01:12, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Compare with the article Walt Disney Classics which is not allowed to contain non-free photos of all of the films discussed in it. What is the difference between that article and the way you're using the image in this article? --Stefan2 (talk) 01:47, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stefan2, that is a good question because it precisely illustrates the point, and precisely demonstrates what WP:NFC#UUI is saying. If you read through the Walt Disney Classics article, you will see that there is no critical commentary, merely a recitation of box office statistics. However this photo that was nominated, relates to a book that was discussed with critical commentary, newspaper references, and in-line citations.

The Walt Disney photos fail under the WP:NFC#UUI "critical commentary" standard. This photo meets that standard.

I'm glad you brought up this point, because it helps to illustrate the policy rationale for this photo. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 02:23, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But if you read through this article, you will notice that there is even less critical commentary: the article only lists a few works and mentions some things related to them. --Stefan2 (talk) 19:02, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stefan2, please do not be offended by this - but what you are saying is not true, and does not make sense. The Walt Disney photos had zero critical commentary related to them. That is why they failed the WP:NFC#UUI "critical commentary" standard.

But this photo was accompanied by newspaper articles, direct quotes to those news articles, and in-line citations to those news articles, all of which dealt with the book associated with this specific photo. So this photo was accompanied by much more critical commentary than the Walt Disney article which you mentioned. The Disney article had no critical commentary, but merely a recitation of box office statistics. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 20:37, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Butlerian.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NFC#UUI §2: CD covers as part of a discography are disallowed. This is a similar situation: lots of non-free book covers in a list of books. Stefan2 (talk) 23:46, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

STRONG KEEP. This is not a "random assembly" of book covers, or merely a "list of books." This specific book was edited by the subject of this Wikipedia article. The book cover is a clear and specific way to illustrate the book, which the subject edited.

The significance of this precise book is discussed in the article itself, and numerous in-line citations are also provided.

Also, this is a book cover of a published hardcover book. The publisher who owns the copyright is not harmed or damaged in any way by the use of this image. In fact, since the publisher wants to sell its books, the publisher benefits from the inclusion of this image.

In addition, the image is not being used in a promotional manner, and does not tarnish or compromise the underlying product. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 00:08, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, images of CD covers in a discography are not a "random assembly" of CD covers, or merely a "list of CDs." Those specific CDs are made by the subject of a single Wikipedia article, but images of them are still not allowed in a discography. This is exactly the same situation. --Stefan2 (talk) 00:14, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding WP:NFC#UUI, please note that WP:NFC#UUI defines the following as an allowable use:

Cover art: Cover art from various items, for visual identification only in the context of critical commentary of that item (not for identification without critical commentary).

This is precisely the way this photo was used in this article, with critical commentary, newspaper reviews, and in-line citations about this specific book. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 01:15, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Compare with the article Walt Disney Classics which is not allowed to contain non-free photos of all of the films discussed in it. What is the difference between that article and the way you're using the image in this article? --Stefan2 (talk) 01:47, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stefan2, that is a good question because it precisely illustrates the point, and precisely demonstrates what WP:NFC#UUI is saying. If you read through the Walt Disney Classics article, you will see that there is no critical commentary, merely a recitation of box office statistics. However this photo that was nominated, relates to a book that was discussed with critical commentary, newspaper references, and in-line citations.

The Walt Disney photos fail under the WP:NFC#UUI "critical commentary" standard. This photo meets that standard.

I'm glad you brought up this point, because it helps to illustrate the policy rationale for this photo. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 02:24, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But if you read through this article, you will notice that there is even less critical commentary: the article only lists a few works and mentions some things related to them. --Stefan2 (talk) 19:02, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stefan2, please do not be offended by this - but what you are saying is not true, and does not make sense. The Walt Disney photos had zero critical commentary related to them. That is why they failed the WP:NFC#UUI "critical commentary" standard.

But this photo was accompanied by newspaper articles, direct quotes to those news articles, and in-line citations to those news articles, all of which dealt with the book associated with this specific photo. So this photo was accompanied by much more critical commentary than the Walt Disney article which you mentioned. The Disney article had no critical commentary, but merely a recitation of box office statistics. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 20:37, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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