Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2007 June 19

< Wikipedia:Files for deletion
(Redirected from Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2007 June 19)
< June 18 June 20 >

June 19 edit

Image:131asimmons.jpg edit

Image:131asimmons.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by ARTEST4ECHO (notify | contribs).
  • This image does not appear to be a mugshot, though it is tagged as one; further, it appears like a professional portrait and, since the source gives no indication as to the copyright holder, it should be deleted. Iamunknown 00:18, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Jyoung.jpg edit

Image:Jyoung.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Twelsht (notify | contribs).
  • This is an image used previously for vandalism which exists in articles soon to be speedy deleted. Wikidudeman (talk) 00:34, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The dude-with-headphones is a recent upload that overlays a valid image here...vandalism by User:Stillblade, a long-term-non-productive editor (I just gave him a level4 warning for this). However, the image previous image is not used anywhere, so I have no objection to nuking it. DMacks 00:41, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:SANY0153.JPG edit

Image:SANY0153.JPG (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Alfredwhitmore (notify | contribs).

Image:TV_face_RGB.JPG edit

Image:TV_face_RGB.JPG (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Genesis12 (notify | contribs).

Image:Djbabu.jpg edit

Image:Djbabu.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by RtnlSltn (notify | contribs).

Image:HPIM0097.JPG edit

Image:HPIM0097.JPG (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Brookschris (notify | contribs).

Image:Robert_DiVentio.jpg edit

Image:Robert_DiVentio.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by EObannion (notify | contribs).

Image:Kelly1.jpg edit

Image:Kelly1.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Wirth.christian (notify | contribs).

Image:DSC00732.JPG edit

Image:DSC00732.JPG (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Ehinton47 (notify | contribs).

Image:Nrn.png edit

Image:Nrn.png (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Studentshow radio (notify | contribs).

Image:BenWay2.jpg edit

Image:BenWay2.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Fuzzypenguins (notify | contribs).

Image:Mpls_010.jpg edit

Image:Mpls_010.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by RLudens2009 (notify | contribs).

Image:Airtoprofile.jpg edit

Image:Airtoprofile.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Loatharofthehillpeople (notify | contribs).

Image:Taps1.jpg edit

Image:Taps1.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Fenix51 (notify | contribs).

Image:Benbyfire.jpg edit

Image:Benbyfire.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Fenix51 (notify | contribs).

Image:Ben_kurland.jpg edit

Image:Ben_kurland.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Fenix51 (notify | contribs).

Image:CFPgloves.jpg edit

Image:CFPgloves.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by CFPMMA (notify | contribs).

Image:Syd_Straw_VAE.jpg edit

Image:Syd_Straw_VAE.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Vermont Arts Exchange (notify | contribs).

Image:Lunch_kids_basketball.JPG edit

Image:Lunch_kids_basketball.JPG (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by French breeze (notify | contribs).

Image:TheDilapidatedHouseonHerronHill.jpg edit

Image:TheDilapidatedHouseonHerronHill.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by PixOnTrax (notify | contribs).

Image:MilGem_class_corvette_specifications.jpg edit

Image:MilGem_class_corvette_specifications.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Savunma Sanayii Müsteşarlığı (notify | contribs).
  • Not free, easily replaceable by text. Iamunknown 01:00, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Nabi_1.jpg edit

Image:Nabi_1.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Y yogi (notify | contribs).

Image:Nabi_2.jpg edit

Image:Nabi_2.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Y yogi (notify | contribs).

Image:Tammela-dawn.jpg edit

Image:Tammela-dawn.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by -Majestic- (notify | contribs).
  • The quote from virtual.finland.fi given on the image description pages suggests that this image is not free. Furthermore, it is unused and, while it is beautiful, it is replaceable. Iamunknown 01:02, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Regal_Dragon_by_gav.jpg edit

Image:Regal_Dragon_by_gav.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Gavin Scott (notify | contribs).

Image:Funny_gurn.jpg edit

Image:Funny_gurn.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Goregantuan (notify | contribs).

Image:SUNP0052.JPG edit

Image:SUNP0052.JPG (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Goregantuan (notify | contribs).

Image:Blowhawk1.jpg edit

Image:Blowhawk1.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Bc1774 (notify | contribs).

Image:SchoolBus.jpg edit

Image:SchoolBus.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Minbaili (notify | contribs).

Image:Less_than_three.png edit

Image:Less_than_three.png (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Phorpus (notify | contribs).

Image:Ogre_Dark_Lords_Of_Doom.jpg edit

Image:Ogre_Dark_Lords_Of_Doom.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Forthron (notify | contribs).

Image:Mitch_A.jpg edit

Image:Mitch_A.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Sffilms (notify | contribs).

Image:Clazziquai-christina.jpg edit

Image:Clazziquai-christina.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Ckj4ever (notify | contribs).
  • orphaned image, absent uploader, unlikely to be released GFDL, unable to locate image on source User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 01:12, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:IndepenFC.jpg edit

Image:IndepenFC.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Indpfc (notify | contribs).

Image:Picture_040.jpg edit

Image:Picture_040.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Kkkswiss (notify | contribs).

Image:Newnick1.jpg edit

Image:Newnick1.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Bright1064 (notify | contribs).

Image:KDS_logo.png edit

Image:KDS_logo.png (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Titan602 (notify | contribs).
The logo is free as it was created by myself, however you can delete it as it is no longer needed - Titan602 - The mind of darkness 15:39, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Graignamanagh22.jpg edit

Image:Graignamanagh22.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Murfie (notify | contribs).

Image:Cubist_Video_Montage_without_hockney_and_picasso_of_a_river_MkV_0001.jpg edit

Image:Cubist_Video_Montage_without_hockney_and_picasso_of_a_river_MkV_0001.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Gumbertron (notify | contribs).

Image:Cureh-59.jpg edit

Image:Cureh-59.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Raverinnigeria (notify | contribs).

Image:Mo_wiki3.jpg edit

Image:Mo_wiki3.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Moabudu (notify | contribs).

Image:Mo_wiki11.jpg edit

Image:Mo_wiki11.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Moabudu (notify | contribs).

Image:Mo_wiki2.jpg edit

Image:Mo_wiki2.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Moabudu (notify | contribs).

Image:JordanCrowder.JPG edit

Image:JordanCrowder.JPG (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Jordancrowder (notify | contribs).

Image:Coepnexus.jpg edit

Image:Coepnexus.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Priyeshgandhi (notify | contribs).

Image:Mood_indicator_enrapture.jpg edit

Image:Mood_indicator_enrapture.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Cott12 (notify | contribs).

Image:Satellites-LV-in-a-practise.jpg edit

Image:Satellites-LV-in-a-practise.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Edgarszilde (notify | contribs).

Image:Python1320.jpg edit

Image:Python1320.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Python1320 (notify | contribs).

Image:Mavado_victory_pose.JPG edit

Image:Mavado_victory_pose.JPG (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Mariusrhinox (notify | contribs).

Image:LatexScarFromDickSmith'sKit.jpg edit

Image:LatexScarFromDickSmith'sKit.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Pyrofex (notify | contribs).

Image:Cristoffer_Wold_Andersen.JPG edit

Image:Cristoffer_Wold_Andersen.JPG (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Sixx166 (notify | contribs).

Image:Eirik_Knudsen.JPG edit

Image:Eirik_Knudsen.JPG (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Sixx166 (notify | contribs).

Image:Fredrik_Stensønes.JPG edit

Image:Fredrik_Stensønes.JPG (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Sixx166 (notify | contribs).

Image:Morten_Brekken.jpg edit

Image:Morten_Brekken.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Sixx166 (notify | contribs).

Image:Julebord.jpg edit

Image:Julebord.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Sixx166 (notify | contribs).

Image:Avsagd_jazzband.JPG edit

Image:Avsagd_jazzband.JPG (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Sixx166 (notify | contribs).

Image:Jakes12292007-all2.jpg edit

Image:Jakes12292007-all2.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Lorntell (notify | contribs).

Image:L_d359a9dab1179f0605b410c28aee1ae8.gif edit

Image:L_d359a9dab1179f0605b410c28aee1ae8.gif (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Lorntell (notify | contribs).

Image:IMG1_2622.jpg edit

Image:IMG1_2622.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Weaverz 21 (notify | contribs).

Image:N43006402_30611995_7073.jpg edit

Image:N43006402_30611995_7073.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Sempione00 (notify | contribs).

Image:Loop.pdf edit

Image:Loop.pdf (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Discussions: Singularities in Navier Stokes (notify | contribs).

Image:9951198.jpg edit

Image:9951198.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Engeneer (notify | contribs).

Image:S5001257.JPG edit

Image:S5001257.JPG (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Engeneer (notify | contribs).

Image:HMS Tabard (P342).jpg edit

Image:HMS Tabard (P342).jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Gdr (notify | contribs).


Image:AnthonyHope TheHeardOfPrincessOsra.jpg edit

Image:AnthonyHope TheHeardOfPrincessOsra.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Kevinalewis (notify | contribs).
  • Not fair use; obsoleted by image:osra.jpg. This is not a "book cover"; this is a photo of a book. The photo seems to have an auction site watermark, and we don't have permission to reuse the photo. The book is not modern; it is from 1896. The image is an orphan. I have uploaded a replacement image scanned from my personal copy and released to PD. - PKM 02:56, 19 June 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Image:RRHF500Kiosk.JPG edit

Image:RRHF500Kiosk.JPG (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Wasted Time R (notify | contribs).
  • Image is indistinct, out of focus, and poorly framed. It's nearly impossible to tell what this photo depicts. —Psychonaut 02:58, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Jamesstunt1.jpg edit

Image:Jamesstunt1.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Xambia (notify | contribs).
  • Highly dubious claim that the uploader is the author of this image. One would think that he would upload his original, not a version with a Getty Images watermark. Probability that even if he was the creator, Getty Images would hold the rights to the photo after it was sold. Part of a probable hoax that is currently at AfD here — Resolute 04:52, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have tagged this for speedy deletion. As you say, if he has permission to use it, he should be able to get a copy without the watermark anyway. I would expect him to explain his position with respect to Getty before he uploads this again. Fourohfour 16:33, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
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:

Various RBD song samples edit

Wikipedia contains 16 different 30-second song samples from the group RBD. These are listed on various articles on albums and songs. I am unsure whether this violates criterion #3 of WP:NFCC. Comments would be appreciated. The samples are listed below. – Quadell (talk) (random) 12:48, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. To be clear, I don't think these should all be deleted. But if this is too many to comply with criterion #3, then some of them need to be deleted. Guidance from the community would be welcome. – Quadell (talk) (random) 12:53, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I did not read that, so just to point the notables out, I think you should leave "Rebelde", "Solo Quédate en Silencio", "Nuestro Amor", "Ser o Parecer", "Tu Amor" and "Wanna Play". The others are less notable. -- Luigi-ish 13:06, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comments. It is very useful to have someone familiar with the topic tell us which are the most important. – Quadell (talk) (random) 20:02, 19 June 2007 (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.

Image:Peteranswers2.jpg edit

Image:Peteranswers2.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Jamesr2 (notify | contribs).
  • Unencyclopedic, original research, derivative image of possibly unfree software, used for POV pushing — -N 15:41, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Beach_Shot_Band1.jpg edit

Image:Beach_Shot_Band1.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Friends For Hire (notify | contribs).
  • Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, only contrib MECU≈talk 15:42, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Sphingosine-Synthesis.png edit

Image:Sphingosine-Synthesis.png (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Jag123 (notify | contribs).
  • stereochemistry is incorrect. Corrected version uploaded as Image:Sphingosine_synthesis_corrected.png — Roadnottaken 16:36, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Concur. In cases like this, sometimes easier to upload a new (corrected) version to the original image's name instead of at a new name (and having to change the link in all pages that include the old one). DMacks 17:02, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Cefalu.jpg edit

Image:Cefalu.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by (Automated conversion) (notify | contribs).
  • OR + dodgy license - GFDL presumed — Papa November 1 16:59, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I added the GFDL presumed because I believe the image is not a candidate for speedy deletion, however it is for regular deletion. -N 15:20, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Deleted, commons image showing through. – Quadell (talk) (random) 16:52, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Lynn4.jpg edit

Image:Lynn4.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Machocarioca (notify | contribs).
  • No evidence this was released as promo material. Source is a fansite. Abu badali (talk) 17:36, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Tanyarob.jpg edit

Image:Tanyarob.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Machocarioca (notify | contribs).
  • No evidence this was released as promo material. Source is a fansite. Abu badali (talk) 17:37, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Xenia2.jpg edit

Image:Xenia2.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Machocarioca (notify | contribs).
  • No evidence this was released as promo material. Source is a fansite- Abu badali (talk) 17:41, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:ChoushinryuTatsuya.jpg edit

Image:ChoushinryuTatsuya.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Therevenger (notify | contribs).
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:

Image:Yuri_Lowenthal.jpg edit

Image:Yuri_Lowenthal.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Jack_Cox (notify | contribs).
  • Strange licensing info. Fair use rationale claims the image in the public domain (???), although no evidence is given. Abu badali (talk) 17:48, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Extremely Strong Keep:Totally False misinformation has been given by the previous image creator, If you look through the Image uploads, that were there before this current photo was uploaded. Mr. Lowenthal himself uploaded his own personal picture to Wikipedia and thus has essentially given the right to have photos of himself on here. If you are still confused contact him at User:El yurio or even email him. This user as well has been known to have a vendetta against me and other people.--Jack Cox 18:52, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Violates WP:NFCC #1. In fact, this should have just been slapped with {{subst:rfu2}} instead of coming through IFD. If Mr Lowenthal wants his photo on his article, tell him to upload a freely licensed one. In addition, saying that Abu badali has a "vendetta" against you implies you wronged him in some way and he's doing this solely to get back at you. howcheng {chat} 19:28, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • New image is claimed PD, and I see no reason to doubt it. Kept. If this is a copyvio, it should be listed at WP:CP. – Quadell (talk) (random) 13:24, 26 June 2007 (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.

Image:Lingleinauguration2002.jpg edit

Image:Lingleinauguration2002.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Gerald_Farinas (notify | contribs).
  • Unnecessary non-notable unfree image from a news agency. Abu badali (talk) 17:50, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I actually have free pictures of her, they will be uploaded to Commons shortly. -N 15:17, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep when I started orphaning this image from the articles it was in I noticed the image was very well placed in Qur'an oath controversy of the 110th United States Congress and is used for appropriate critical commentary in that article. Its use in any other article is not fair use however. -N 03:54, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    There's no critical commentary on the image. There is a commentary on the event depicted on the image, and the image doesn't significantly increases the reader's understanding of the commentary. --Abu badali (talk) 04:17, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, the image is still necessary in the one article it remains in. "Critical commentary on the image" is not one of our non-free content criteria. – Quadell (talk) (random) 15:41, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    We only use unfree images from news agencies when the image itself is notable and deserves critical commentary. We can't fairly use an image from a news agency to illustrate a text about the news event depicted. Luckily, the text about the event in question doesn't need an image to be understood. --Abu badali (talk) 16:02, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the image is not necessary to understanding the event, so there's no reason to tread on the news agency's copyright. —Remember the dot (talk) 17:05, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Clear violation of WP:NFCC #2. howcheng {chat} 20:53, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
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.

All deleted as per Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2007 May 31#Image:StarTrekEnterprise Cast.jpg and Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 June 15. These can all be replaced by screenshots of the characters, which are far less infringing of copyright. howcheng {chat} 22:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Various Star Trek images edit

  • Not enough source information to verify the claim that this is promotional material (it's more likely an image from startrek.com wrongly believed to be promotional material). Abu badali (talk) 17:54, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: - merged nominations. The Evil Spartan 20:12, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image:Ezri_Dax.jpg
  • Image:Julian_Bashir.png
  • Image:ST-Phlox.JPG
  • Image:ST-HoshiSato.JPG
  • Image:ST-MalcolmReed.JPG
  • Image:Kes_(Star_Trek).jpg
  • Image:Pulaski_promo_tng_1.jpg
  • Image:ST-CharlesTucker.JPG
  • Image:JamesKirkTiberious.jpg
  • Image:Neelix.jpg
  • Image:BorgQueen.jpg
  • Image:Harrykimstartrek.jpg
  • Image:Tomparis002.jpg
  • Image:Belannatorres.jpg
  • Image:Tuvok.gif
  • Image:Chacotay_001.jpg
  • Image:Janeway.jpg
  • Image:Leeta.jpg
  • Image:Bariel_Antos.jpg
  • Image:Terry_Farrell_Star_Trek_1.jpg
  • Image:Sisko8.jpg
  • Image:Janice_Rand_TOS.jpeg
  • Image:Jamesdoohan.jpg
  • Keep - these images are all clearly promotional, and are not free-use replaceable as they refer to fictional characters. The Evil Spartan 20:48, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Contest: There's no such thing as a "clearly promotional" image. We can't tell than an image is promotional just by looking at it Being promotional is about the license and purpose of the image release and, without reliable source information, we can't determine that. For illustrating fictional characters of tv-series, screenshots are a safer bet, as screenshots are a minimal part of the whole copyrighted work (the serie's episode), and not an independent copyrighted work (as such posed pictures). --Abu badali (talk) 16:42, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • We can't tell than an image is promotional just by looking at it. Actually, we can. YOU can't, that's fine, but any person willing to use even a little bit of common sense can. If the context of the image - a single character in costume and makeup, in a "portrait" style setting, looking straight at the camera, doesn't give it away, perhaps the words of your fellow editors, who say "The image was specifically distributed by Paramount as a promotional photo to display the character (exactly as the image is used now)." You, again, think the word of that editor isn't good enough, but unfortunately both his statement and the content of the photo are telling the same story - it is a promotional picture. There can be no free equivalent. We KNOW who the copyright holder is (Paramount), and we're using the image in compliance with all ten of WP:NFCC. These images should be kept. Jenolen speak it! 17:56, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      Jenolen, I want to respectfully say that you're mistaken. What makes an image "promotional" is the conditions under which the image is distributed, and not what is displayed on the image or how it's displayed.
      Our fellow uploader editor saying it's promotional also doesn't makes it promotional, as he could be mistaken about the what a promotional photo is, just like you are. That's why we need (verifiable) source information about not only who the copyright holder is, but also about when, where and why were these images released. --Abu badali (talk) 21:24, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, with caveats. These images may or may not be promotional, but they seem to fulfill our non-free content criteria either way. However, some need to be reduced to fulfill criterion #3, and others must be removed from infoboxes in articles on the actors, in order to fulfill criterion #1. – Quadell (talk) (random) 01:26, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Contest: Quadell, our non-free content criteria requires the images to be properly sourced, to have an appropriate fair-use tag and a fair use rationale for each use.
    1. None of those images are properly sourced, as none has verifiable info about the its publication.
    2. None of these image has an "appropriate" fair-use tag, as they are all tagged with {{Non-free promotional}} which is only for images that are "known to have come from a press kit", which is not the case here.
    3. And the few of these image that grasp a fair use rationale, base the rationale on the assumption that this are promotional images.
    So, to fulfill our unfree material criteria, I believe it makes a lot of difference either these images are or are not promotional.
    It isn't uncommon for editors to believe that almost any images found on the internet are promotional, or to believe that you are welcome to publicize any image you own printed copy of. But this is simply a misconception.
    Also, if necessary, see this recent ifd for another case of an image from startrek.com that was used under the wrong assumption that it was promotional material. --Abu badali (talk) 16:42, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • As to sourcing, they are all (weakly) sourced to Paramount Pictures. There's no other entity that could possibly hold the copyright, is there? I don't see how including a proximate source (a website hosting the images) would improve the sourcing, since the original source is clearly Paramount, right? Regarding fairuse tag, it would not be difficult to change the license to non-free-fair-use-in, and I volunteer to do this (if it looks they won't be deleted either way). Somehow I doubt you would withdraw the nomination if the tag were correct. Same with the rationales. I disagree with the decision in the precedent you site, by the way, but I concede it was decided in-process, so I would endorse deletion if it were taken to Deletion Review. – Quadell (talk) (random) 21:46, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      The source information is incomplete because it doesn't says when/where/why were these images released/produced. If they were produced to be used by startrek.com, for instance, it means that our use replaces the original market role for these images.
      Our policy doesn't ask for verifiable source information just to make it difficult to upload an image. We need completely verifiable source informartion before we can even try to write a serious fair use rationale. It doesn't help much to simply state that the image is "Copyrighted to paramount pictures" or "Copyrighted to CBS", as this isn't enough to determine either our use competes or not with how the copyright holder intended to use the image. We need to know when/where/why were these images released/produced.
      Wikipedia has no interest in to (boldly) explore the limits of fair use law in such case (nor to rely on they-will-never-sue-us arguments). It's always possible to use a minimal part of a copyrighted work (a screenshot from an episode, in this case) to talk about the copyrighted work itself. It would be not only legal, but also ok with Foundation's statement on the matter. --Abu badali (talk) 00:55, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Abu is trying to make new Wikipedia policy with statements such as The source information is incomplete because it doesn't says when/where/why were these images released/produced. I'm unclear which part of WP:NFCC requires us to say where, or even why an image was released or produced. Quadell is also right on the money when he says Paramount Pictures (or its current corporate version, CBS/Paramount) is UNQUESTIONABLY the copyright holder on these images. There is no case being made here, or anywhere, that there is any doubt about that. Abu is also hung up on a "we don't know what they'll want to do in the future with their promotional images, and therefore, we're infringing on their market role" argument. I have no idea why he believes promotional photos, which are expressly distributed to the media for wide reuse, might suddenly become a legal nightmare for Wikipedia. Here, Abu is raising an unfounded fear; used within the parameters of the much-stricter-than-the-law-requires WP:NFCC there is zero legal jeopardy; this is simply a false scare tactic. The standards to which these images are being asked to conform are not only unreasonable, they're outside the boundaries of both WP:NONFREE and WP:NFCC. As long as the images meet those standards, they should be kept. Also - current policy does not prefer screenshots to publicity photos on some sort of "one frame of a show is less infringing than a reduced resolution version of a photo" argument. I have no idea where that's coming from; it certainly doesn't enjoy the consensus support of this community, and is not a part of either policy listed above. Jenolen speak it! 09:55, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Dispute: Just provide evidence that these images were released as "promotional images" (as you take for granted in your whole argumentation), and you'll be addressing the nomination's concerns.
    And consider rereading my posts, as I never said anything about "what they'll want to do in the future with their promotional images", as the whole point is that we don't know these to be promotional images. --Abu badali (talk) 12:56, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Startrek.com's licensing makes it plain these are not promotional photos, and these high-quality images are replaceable by less-infringing works, such as photos at fan conventions, screen captures, and images of merchandise. -N 15:12, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: some of these do appear to be truly promotional, and care should be used when closing this. The James Doohan one appears to be a signed poster (as I mentioned, images of merchandise should be considered promotional). -N 15:14, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • I checked ten of these images at random, and so no mention of Startrek.com. Perhaps you're confusing this deletion with another one? Jenolen speak it! 18:00, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • As per the nom "it's more likely an image from startrek.com wrongly believed to be promotional material". There would be no other official place on the Internet such high quality studio pictures would come from. It's quite obvious they aren't screen captures. -N 20:15, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
          • So, we're going with "likelyhood" now? An editor THINKS this images must be from Startrek.com, so they should be deleted? That doesn't work. He needs to prove they are from Startrek.com, and are exclusive to Startrek.com, and so far, he has done neither. On the other hand, the images I checked CLEARLY were promotional in nature, as they adhere to the long established traditional standards for such photos... plus, of course, the uploaders indicated these were promotional in nature. Abu wants to say these are from Startrek.com - great. But that don't make it so... By the way - I'm sure you won't at all be pursueded that this whole exercise is completely superfluous, since we KNOW who the copyright holder of the image is, right? ("(TM), (R) and copyright Paramount Pictures. "Star Trek" and related marks are trademarks of Paramount Pictures" being burned on to every official piece of merchandise...) Jenolen speak it! 20:54, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
            It's not that we have to delete these images because they're "likely" from startrek.com. We have to delete them because we have no reason to believe they are promotional. You mistakenly believes that any image of fictional characters looking to the camera is intended for reuse by the media, but that's unfortunately not true. And it's very likely that the uploaders have committed the same (or a similar) mistake as you.
            And this information is not "superfluous". Simply stating that these images are "copyrighted by Paramount Pictures" doesn't give us any clue on either or not their use in our publications competes with the use the copyright holder intended for these images. --Abu badali (talk) 21:47, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
            • Competition? Well, if CBS/Paramount want to start a free/libre encyclopedia, I suppose that's their right under the GFDL. But how can our encyclopedic fair use of their copyrighted material be considered competition?
              You mistakenly believes that any image of fictional characters looking to the camera is intended for reuse by the media, but that's unfortunately not true. No, what is true is that, if our use of the image met both U.S. fair use standards (which all of these do) and the much stricter WP:NFCC (they do), then we could easily and successfully claim fair use to use them. We've entirely lost sight of the main concerns of the fair use community - and are now focused on pursuing individual image deletions for really hair-splitting policy reasons. For example, in these images, we know who the copyright holder is - undisputably. There is no argument being made that these images are anything other than 100% copyrighted to CBS Studios, Inc. (the corporate successor to Paramount Pictures) Having identified the copyright holder - and agreeing that no free image can now or ever be created to replace them - we're shifting to over-valuing parts of WP:NFCC in an attempt to stamp out these images. First off, since they're legitimately encyclopedic, shouldn't you be valuing this content a little more than you are? But secondly - the "competition" clause that you profess to worry about is simply one part of the overall equation of a fair use determination, and I find it really disingenuous to see people concerned for CBS/Paramount's future corporate opportunities to exploit what are in some cases 40 year old promotional photographs. Your primary concern should be Wikipedia, not whether or not an old photo of Yeoman Rand is going to someday show up on a mug. And as long as these images meet our strict WP:NFCC, when interpreted reasonably and rationally, then they should be kept. Jenolen speak it! 18:43, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
              Yes, Competition. I'm not aware of CBS/Paramount planing to start an Libre Encyclopedia, but I'm sure they are active in the market of "Startrek Related Webpages", and whenever you copy material from their product (their webpage, yes, it's an independent product) to our product (our webpage), we're doing unfair competition.
              Repeating that our use of these images are ok with U.S. law and with Wikipedia's policy doesn't make it so. Repeating that we know who the copyright holder is also doesn't address the concerns raised on this IFD. Saying that they are not replaceable by free material is also not relevant. This IFD deals with criterion #2, which is not an "over-valuing part" of the criteria (no part of it is).
              "I find it really disingenuous to see people concerned for CBS/Paramount's future corporate opportunities...", but Wikipedia is pretty much concerned in respecting such opportunities. Be prepare to respect this kind of opportunities if you plan to contribute to this project.--Abu badali (talk) 19:37, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your argument might make some sense... if you had proven ANY of these images had come from Startrek.com. So far, I've seen no such proof, and your "likelyhood" argument is unconvincing. And even then, the nature of these photos (and yes, they do have a nature, and that nature is promotional) makes the rest of your deletion argument similarly unconvincing.

And yes, I do believe Wikipedia editors should be concerned with Wikipedia first, and other corporate entities second. I'm sorry that you find this to be an odd position. After all, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and I would guess that all of the rules and regulations about it that you seem so intent on literally enforcing are designed to further the goal of writing an encyclopedia, which includes coverage of copyrighted material. Perhaps you should adjust your expectations for the project? Or has the coverage of copyrighted material become so poisonous to you that you would enjoy contributing in a different section? There are several opportunities for involvement at Wikipedia that don't involve image deletion. Perhaps you would be happier working on one of them? Please feel free to post at the Village Pump if you need some suggestions... Jenolen speak it! 20:37, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have to prove that these images are from startrek.com. It's the uploader (or some other editor) that has to prove that these images came from a press kit or similar source, and were intended to be used by anyone in the media. But as all source information we have is "Copyright CBS/Paramount", we can't be sure that these images we're intended to be used by anyone in the media.
I'm not against fair use nor against coverage of copyrighted material. Using screenshots for fulfilling our needs to illustrate fictional tv characters would be using a minimal part of the complete copyrighted work, and would be completely ok with the law and our policy. (Not that you haven't heard I explained my position on this issue dozen of times before...) --Abu badali (talk) 20:50, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all per the discussion already held at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2007 May 31#Image:StarTrekEnterprise Cast.jpg and confirmed at its DRV at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 June 15. Not everything that looks like a promotional image is one. —Angr 13:36, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • In fact, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar... and a promtional image, whether or not they meet whichever part of Wikipedia's ever changing and arcane definitions, is just a promotional image. There is a way too literal interpretation of Wikipedia rules going on here... orchestrated by one editor and one admin who have a long-standing prejudice against these types of image. Speaking of image types, there are, in fact, three major classes of image from Star Trek that I can think of; 1) Promotional images, such as these, which feature the character in costume, makeup, etc. These are the types of images you would commonly see distriubted to the media, or signed by the actors. 2) "Behind the scenes" images. Say, for example, this one, which show the actors in costume, make up, etc., and some aspect of the production process. 3) Screenshots. Please note types 1 and 3 are absolutely, 100% copyrighted, registered, and trademarked to CBS Studios, Inc. (The successor company to Paramount Pictures). Type 2 - the behind the scenes photos - could conceivably be somewhat more rights complicated. Say, if Time Magazine or Starlog Magazine gets permission to visit a set, and take photos... But since all of the photos CLEARLY fall in to category 1, and since we know both who the copyright holder is (CBS Studios) and what the original market role of the images is (to promote Star Trek in a variety of forms), and since no free equivalent can be created, these images clearly fall within our very restrictive fair use guidelines. No amount of confusing the issue with "they look like they could be from Startrek.com" changes the fact that these pictures are promotional in nature, and are properly being fairly used under our quite restrictive policy. Jenolen speak it! 06:30, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Just like there's no such thing as a "fair use image" (there's the fair use of an image), it makes no sense to talk about pictures that are "promotional in nature". --Abu badali (talk) 19:37, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • A fourth type - again, from a rights standpoint much like number 1: Photos taken of action on set, during filming or rehearsal, meant to look like a still frame from the finished TV or film image. These are taken by studio photographers, and their chain of copyright is undisputed; they are unequivocally 100% copyrighted CBS Studios, Inc. These also are released for publicity purposes, and should be usable within the confines of WP:NFCC. Jenolen speak it! 18:43, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      "These also are released for publicity purposes" - They may be released or they may be not. The copyright holder will do whatever it want with the image. It may release it for anyone in the media to use. It may serve this image as exclusive content on its official website. It may license this image exclusively to a given magazine. It may release it to be used solely by any blog. You'll need to be a psychic to guess what the release terms were just by looking to the image. --Abu badali (talk) 20:39, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • And that's the nice part about fair use... You don't actually have to CARE what the release terms are, because you are acknowledging that a) there is a copyright holder b) you know who it is and c) you're using the work anyway! That's why all this process junk about "license terms" and "competition" is a bunch of hooey. As you point out, we're either using the image fairly, or we're not. There is no dispute as to who the copyright holder is, and should be little concern on Wikipedia's part as to what the copyright holder wants to do with the image. If we're wanting to print up copies of the image and sell 'em at conventions, yes, that would be problem. But fortunately, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. And we're decided, as a community, to cover topics that are under others copyrights. In this case, we have identified the copyright holder, and are using the images within the confines of the very restrictive WP:NFCC. I know you don't like that, but hey, eventually, you're going to have to deal with it. Until, you know, the English language Wikipedia "goes German" and bans fair use altogether. As it is, there's no need to play psychic... we know who the copyright holder is, and we're using the work anyway. Fairly. Jenolen speak it! 20:07, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        We cant print up copies of the image and sell 'em at conventions because the copyright holder already does that. We can't use these images to enhance our webpages because the copyright holder already does that.
        We pretty much need to CARE what the release terms is if we're saying the our distribution does not undermines the ability of the copyright holder from profiting from the copyrighted work (let it be profit by selling copies or by having the coolest website).
        But anyway, feel free to ignore my arguments and write any loosely related reply repeating that "we know who the copyright holder is" and that our use "is ok with the law and with our policies."  ;) --Abu badali (talk) 20:39, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They may be released or they may be not. If they're unreleased, then how did they end up here? Ridiculous... Please use some common sense. Jenolen speak it! 20:10, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"They may be released for publicity purposes" or they may be not released for publicity purposes and released for some other purpose, like examples given in the rest of the comment. --Abu badali (talk) 20:27, 25 June 2007 (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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


Image:Saopaulo2.gif edit

Image:Saopaulo2.gif (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Columbo2 (notify | contribs).

Image:Christiane_amanpour.jpg edit

Image:Christiane_amanpour.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Tony619 (notify | contribs).
  • Non-free TV screenshot that serves only a decorative purpose in the article, violating WP:NFCC #8. howcheng {chat} 20:06, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:HMS Vanguard (1909)a.gif edit

Image:HMS Vanguard (1909)a.gif (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by SpookyMulder (notify | contribs).

Image:Falklands Map.gif edit

Image:Falklands Map.gif (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Astrotrain (notify | contribs).

Image:Sulfur lamp light pipes in warehouse.gif edit

Image:Sulfur lamp light pipes in warehouse.gif (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by SDC (notify | contribs).

Image:FHatton.gif edit

Image:FHatton.gif (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by The Mystery Man (notify | contribs).

Image:Sulfur lamp spectrum.GIF edit

Image:Sulfur lamp spectrum.GIF (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by SDC (notify | contribs).

Image:Fusion 1000 with light pipe.gif edit

Image:Fusion 1000 with light pipe.gif (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by SDC (notify | contribs).

Image:Ryfly.JPG edit

Image:Ryfly.JPG (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Ikohn (notify | contribs).
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.

Image:DSCN6564 a 1.jpg edit

Image:DSCN6564 a 1.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by ManiacMikey (notify | contribs).
  • Orphaned, not much encyclopedic use- The Evil Spartan 20:45, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and possibly transfer to commons. It has the potential use to illustrate barefoot stuff. WooyiTalk to me? 21:11, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kept pending transfer to Commons. howcheng {chat} 22:17, 25 June 2007 (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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


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.

Image:DSCN6573 a 1.JPG edit

Image:DSCN6573 a 1.JPG (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by ManiacMikey (notify | contribs).

Kept pending transfer to Commons. howcheng {chat} 22:17, 25 June 2007 (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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


Image:Sulfur lamp diagram.gif edit

Image:Sulfur lamp diagram.gif (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by SDC (notify | contribs).
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.

Image:No image.gif edit

Image:No image.gif (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by RebelScum (notify | contribs).
  • Image has been replaced by Image:Replace this image1.svg. This image isn't clear either if it is higher then 90 x 90 pixels. ~ Wikihermit 20:47, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep, it may be useful in some cases. When replacing a small image with no explicit size given in the wikicode, the svg version default to very large, but this small image stays small. Does anyone else find this useful? – Quadell (talk) (random) 01:28, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • P.S. If no one else finds this image useful, don't keep it on my behalf. But to find out, I'd ask that you add {{ifdc|Image:No image.gif}} to every use, and leave it up for a week. Otherwise, people who find the image useful may not know that it is being proposed for deletion. – Quadell (talk) (random) 15:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep is in use. -N 15:47, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kept. howcheng {chat} 22:14, 25 June 2007 (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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


Image:Construction_haybridge_r.JPG edit

Image:Construction_haybridge_r.JPG (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Chileso (notify | contribs).

Image:Matthewjohncampbell.jpg edit

Image:Matthewjohncampbell.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Bbmatt12 (notify | contribs).

Image:M_4ee9f3c1badc29005b71642d07b3f2bf.jpg edit

Image:M_4ee9f3c1badc29005b71642d07b3f2bf.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Willie the groundskeeper (notify | contribs).

Image:Anr2.gif edit

Image:Anr2.gif (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Chriscool334 (notify | contribs).

Image:Drew.png edit

Image:Drew.png (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Chriscool334 (notify | contribs).

Image:Billy.png edit

Image:Billy.png (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Chriscool334 (notify | contribs).

Image:Daniel.png edit

Image:Daniel.png (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Chriscool334 (notify | contribs).

Image:Alan.png edit

Image:Alan.png (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Chriscool334 (notify | contribs).

Image:MattTroy.png edit

Image:MattTroy.png (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Chriscool334 (notify | contribs).

Image:Archa.GIF edit

Image:Archa.GIF (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Chriscool334 (notify | contribs).

Image:1432237738_l.jpg edit

Image:1432237738_l.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Koolguy4 (notify | contribs).

Image:Dale_thomas_632.GIF edit

Image:Dale_thomas_632.GIF (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Fluffyducky (notify | contribs).
  • orphaned animated gif, low quality, unlikely all images used at PD so a PD-self tag is incorrect - some appear to be non-free User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 21:03, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Dale_thomas_165.jpg edit

Image:Dale_thomas_165.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Fluffyducky (notify | contribs).

Image:Dale_thomas_204.jpg edit

Image:Dale_thomas_204.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Fluffyducky (notify | contribs).

Image:Dale_thomas_1015.jpg edit

Image:Dale_thomas_1015.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Fluffyducky (notify | contribs).
  • orphaned image, unlikely PD-self - should be non-free tv screenshot (also, given the collection of images uploaded and that some appear to be personal family, ie not sports action shots, the uploader may be the subject or related to the subject and WP:COI issues may be involved User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 21:10, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Mousey_009.jpg edit

Image:Mousey_009.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by AwtpSIM (notify | contribs).

Image:11_shoebox.gif edit

Image:11_shoebox.gif (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Katka193 (notify | contribs).

Image:Donrober.jpg edit

Image:Donrober.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Hseldon10 (notify | contribs).
  • Fair use image illustrating a living person. Not deleted after being tagged with {{replaceable fair use}}. That it is hard for the uploader to create an image is not relevant. Rettetast 21:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • RE: That is hard is not the only fair use rationale. No free replacement is available, and none can be easily created. It complies with fair use requirements. Other rationale criteria met includes: low-resolution, illustrative, previously published, meets Mexican copyright law under CRESTOMATIA tag (image was generated in Mexico), contributes significantly to the article, image used in article's namespace. I don't know why there is so much interest in deleting this particular picture when it is clearly fair use and justified in the rationale. Hari Seldon 01:04, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete. It complies with 9 out of 10 of our requirements, but our first requirement says that "Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available or could be created that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose" (emphasis added). Since a photograph of him could still be taken and freely licensed, this photo is replaceable and is not acceptable on Wikipedia. I'm sorry. – Quadell (talk) (random) 01:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Just because you can't create a free alternative doesn't mean that someone else can't do it. howcheng {chat} 19:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is it possible it's being used to illustrate this person's tv show? -N 19:43, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Residential_courtyard.jpg edit

Image:Residential_courtyard.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Crazytales (notify | contribs).

Image:PHOT0066.JPG edit

Image:PHOT0066.JPG (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Crazytales (notify | contribs).

Image:PoweruserSS.png edit

Image:PoweruserSS.png (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Crazytales (notify | contribs).
  • An unfree software-screenshot used to illustrate the article the concept of a Power user, could be replaced by a completly free alternative (showing only free software). Abu badali (talk) 21:46, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Yup. I might create a completely free alternative soon. (And a better one, since it wouldn't show the minimized AOL window :D) —Crazytales (talk) (alt) 21:48, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Season3_promo.jpg edit

Image:Season3_promo.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Bree113 (notify | contribs).
  • No evidence to support the claim that this image was released as promotional material. Abu badali (talk) 23:05, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:W CentralniHol2.jpg edit

Image:W CentralniHol2.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by LukaP (notify | contribs).
  • Probable copyright violation. The image is claimed to be in the public domain, but source website does not support this claim. — Ilse@ 23:18, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Videla.jpg edit

Image:Videla.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by MartinRamos92 (notify | contribs).
  • Probable copyright violation. Contradictory templates (fair use and public domain). Can be removed because the image is orphaned. – Ilse@ 23:25, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Minister-O-Cuiv.jpg edit

Image:Minister-O-Cuiv.jpg (delete|talk|history|logs) - uploaded by Irishgrizzly (notify | contribs).
  • Probable copyright violation. Image is released into the public domain by the creator, but it does also mention a source (via website). The source explicitly doesn't release its images into the public domain. — Ilse@ 23:53, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2007_June_19&oldid=1143364447"