Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2007 August 7

< August 6	August 8 >

August 7[edit]

Image:Adobe Bridge Screenshot.jpg[edit]

Image:Adobe Bridge Screenshot.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Alton (notify | contribs).

Superseded by Bridge CS3 screenshot.png, in a different format. I am the uploader for most recent version, but I can't speedy since it's overall a different screen, and in .png. — ALTON .ıl 00:10, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Asha_Bhosle_Raat.jpg[edit]

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

Delete per WP:NFCC#1, replaceable fair use. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 00:38, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Billie_sdi3.JPG[edit]

Image:Billie_sdi3.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Generation talk123 (notify | contribs).

Music video close-up. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding of the topic in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 00:47, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Used commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." Keep for video commentary only. --Knulclunk 02:42, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - single screenshot of a copyrighted video used in segment about the video. Textbook example of meeting NFCC8 - any television programme, movie, music video and so on justifies a single screenshot (multiples maybe, maybe not). Wily D 21:10, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless statements about the artist having a more "sexed up" and "mature" appearance can be cited to reliable sources, since I assume that's what the screenshot is attempting to illustrate. howcheng {chat} 16:54, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Blggreat.JPG[edit]

Image:Blggreat.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Unwrittendrew700 (notify | contribs).

Music video close-up. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding of the topic in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 01:07, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Used commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." Keep for video commentary only.

Shows musician's appearance in video as well as video style, less NFC than showing short clip.--Knulclunk 02:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - single screenshot of a copyrighted video used in segment about the video. Textbook example of meeting NFCC8 - any television programme, movie, music video and so on justifies a single screenshot (multiples maybe, maybe not). Wily D 21:11, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, as it is, the commentary on the video in no way constitutes critical commentary. Neither does it relate to the the content of the image. This image clearly fails WP:NFCC#8. Anrie 08:28, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Borderline_vid.jpg[edit]

Image:Borderline_vid.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Chad427 (notify | contribs).

Music video close-up. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding of the topic in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 01:47, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Shows notable singer's appearance in breakthrough video, arguably the first video superstar of MTV. Singer's appearance and dress most noted and recorded in her videos. Artist's appearance had impact on the music, style and fashion for a generation. Artist's appearance constantly changing, each "stage" worthy of commentary in its own right. Image is very low resolution. --Knulclunk 04:43, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - single screenshot of a copyrighted video used in segment about the video. Textbook example of meeting NFCC8 - any television programme, movie, music video and so on justifies a single screenshot (multiples maybe, maybe not). Wily D 21:12, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and recommend replacement with a screenshot that shows more of what's being described in the article (sipping champagne, or maybe a shot including John Leguizamo). howcheng {chat} 16:56, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:SometimesB.jpg[edit]

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

Music video close-up. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding of the topic in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 01:57, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Used commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." Keep for video commentary only. --Knulclunk 02:42, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - single screenshot of a copyrighted video used in segment about the video. Textbook example of meeting NFCC8 - any television programme, movie, music video and so on justifies a single screenshot (multiples maybe, maybe not). Wily D 21:17, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless the statement "this music video for Sometimes is largely responsible for setting the virginal image that Britney upheld early on in her career" can be cited to a reliable source (since this is what is actually depicted in the scene). howcheng {chat} 16:59, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:CrazyBS.jpg[edit]

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

Music video close-up. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding of the topic in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 01:58, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Used commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." Keep for video commentary only.

Shows musician's appearance in video as well as video style, less NFC than showing short clip.--Knulclunk 02:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - single screenshot of a copyrighted video used in segment about the video. Textbook example of meeting NFCC8 - any television programme, movie, music video and so on justifies a single screenshot (multiples maybe, maybe not). Wily D 21:15, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and recommend replacement with another screenshot showing the "skimpier and sexier" outfit as described in the article. howcheng {chat} 17:21, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:HeartSwing.jpg[edit]

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

Music video close-up. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding of the topic in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 01:58, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Used commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." Keep for video commentary only.

Shows musician's appearance in video as well as video style, less NFC than showing short clip.--Knulclunk 02:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - single screenshot of a copyrighted video used in segment about the video. Textbook example of meeting NFCC8 - any television programme, movie, music video and so on justifies a single screenshot (multiples maybe, maybe not). Wily D 21:17, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and recommend replacement with a screenshot depicting action described in the article. howcheng {chat} 17:22, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Oopsscreenshot.jpg[edit]

Image:Oopsscreenshot.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Jonas89 (notify | contribs).

Music video close-up. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding of the topic in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 01:59, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Used commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." Keep for video commentary only.

Shows musician's appearance in video as well as video style, less NFC than showing short clip.--Knulclunk 02:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - single screenshot of a copyrighted video used in segment about the video. Textbook example of meeting NFCC8 - any television programme, movie, music video and so on justifies a single screenshot (multiples maybe, maybe not). Wily D 21:10, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Lucky_video.jpg[edit]

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

Music video close-up. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding of the topic in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 02:00, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Used commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." Keep for video commentary only.

Shows musician's appearance in video as well as video style, less NFC than showing short clip.--Knulclunk 02:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - single screenshot of a copyrighted video used in segment about the video. Textbook example of meeting NFCC8 - any television programme, movie, music video and so on justifies a single screenshot (multiples maybe, maybe not). Resolution's a little high though, maybe it should be reduced? I will if needed ... Wily D 21:18, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and recommend replacement with a screenshot actually showing something described in the article (throwing sparkles or accepting the Academy Award, for example). howcheng {chat} 17:01, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:SlaveGrind.jpg[edit]

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

Music video close-up. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding of the topic in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 02:00, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Used commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." Keep for video commentary only.

Shows musician's appearance in video as well as video style, less NFC than showing short clip.--Knulclunk 02:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Don't_Let.jpg[edit]

Image:Don't_Let.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Kageorge (notify | contribs).

Music video close-up. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding of the topic in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 02:00, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Used commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." Keep for video commentary only.

Shows musician's appearance in video as well as video style, less NFC than showing short clip.--Knulclunk 02:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - single screenshot of a copyrighted video used in segment about the video. Textbook example of meeting NFCC8 - any television programme, movie, music video and so on justifies a single screenshot (multiples maybe, maybe not). Wily D 21:19, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:SpearsMt.jpg[edit]

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

Music video close-up. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding of the topic in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 02:01, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Used commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." Keep for video commentary only.

Shows musician's appearance in video as well as video style, less NFC than showing short clip.--Knulclunk 02:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - single screenshot of a copyrighted video used in segment about the video. Textbook example of meeting NFCC8 - any television programme, movie, music video and so on justifies a single screenshot (multiples maybe, maybe not). Wily D 21:19, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:SpearsRm.jpg[edit]

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

Music video close-up. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding of the topic in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 02:01, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Used commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." Keep for video commentary only.

Shows musician's appearance in video as well as video style, less NFC than showing short clip.--Knulclunk 02:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - single screenshot of a copyrighted video used in segment about the video. Textbook example of meeting NFCC8 - any television programme, movie, music video and so on justifies a single screenshot (multiples maybe, maybe not). Wily D 21:20, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. First of all, two screenshots from the video are not necessary. Secondly, this scene isn't even mentioned in the article. howcheng {chat} 17:07, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are two different videos, with one screenshot of each. The scene is described in the adjoining text. As with most screen grabs, a short video clip would be more useful, but screen caps fit WP's standard of "least copyrighted assets necessary". --Knulclunk 02:23, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:SpearsDance.jpg[edit]

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

Music video close-up. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding of the topic in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 02:02, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Used commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." Keep for video commentary only.

Shows musician's appearance in video as well as video style, less NFC than showing short clip.--Knulclunk 02:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image deleted. Head shot of Spears that is of no significance to the article. -Nv8200p talk 12:38, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Boyz.jpg[edit]

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

Music video close-up. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding of the topic in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 02:03, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Used commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." Keep for video commentary only.

Shows musician's appearance in video as well as video style, less NFC than showing short clip.--Knulclunk 02:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - single screenshot of a copyrighted video used in segment about the video. Textbook example of meeting NFCC8 - any television programme, movie, music video and so on justifies a single screenshot (multiples maybe, maybe not). Wily D 21:20, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and recommend replacement with a screenshot depicting something described in the article that might actually need an image to understand. howcheng {chat} 17:19, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:BritTox.JPG[edit]

Image:BritTox.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Jean Pear (notify | contribs).

Music video close-up. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding of the topic in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 02:03, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Used commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." Keep for video commentary only.

Shows musician's appearance in video as well as video style, less NFC than showing short clip.--Knulclunk 02:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There is no commentary whatsoever on the scene being depicted in this shot and another screenshot of the video exists in the article as well. howcheng {chat} 18:06, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:BritConcus.jpg[edit]

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

Music video close-up. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding of the topic in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 02:04, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Used commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." Keep for video commentary only.

Shows musician's appearance in video as well as video style, less NFC than showing short clip.--Knulclunk 02:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - single screenshot of a copyrighted video used in segment about the video. Textbook example of meeting NFCC8 - any television programme, movie, music video and so on justifies a single screenshot (multiples maybe, maybe not). Given the contraversy on this video, doubly so here. Wily D 21:15, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:MyPrerogativeCap.jpg[edit]

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

Music video close-up. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding of the topic in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 02:05, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Used commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." Keep for video commentary only.

Shows musician's appearance in video as well as video style, less NFC than showing short clip.--Knulclunk 02:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - single screenshot of a copyrighted video used in segment about the video. Textbook example of meeting NFCC8 - any television programme, movie, music video and so on justifies a single screenshot (multiples maybe, maybe not). Wily D 21:14, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. One sentence hardly constitutes significant commentary on the music video. howcheng {chat} 18:12, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:SpearsDo.jpg[edit]

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

Music video close-up. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding of the topic in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 02:05, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Used commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." Keep for video commentary only.

Shows musician's appearance in video as well as video style, less NFC than showing short clip.--Knulclunk 02:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - single screenshot of a copyrighted video used in segment about the video. Textbook example of meeting NFCC8 - any television programme, movie, music video and so on justifies a single screenshot (multiples maybe, maybe not). Wily D 21:13, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and recommend replacement with a screenshot depicting some action actually described in the article. howcheng {chat} 18:15, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:SpearsBed.jpg[edit]

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

Music video close-up. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding of the topic in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 02:06, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Used commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." Keep for video commentary only.

Shows musician's appearance in video as well as video style, less NFC than showing short clip.--Knulclunk 02:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - single screenshot of a copyrighted video used in segment about the video. Textbook example of meeting NFCC8 - any television programme, movie, music video and so on justifies a single screenshot (multiples maybe, maybe not). Resolution should probably be reduced, I'll do that if requested. Wily D 21:13, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Gerudo in Phantom Hourglass.PNG[edit]

Image:Gerudo in Phantom Hourglass.PNG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Chain of Termina (notify | contribs).

Image is claimed as created by user and release under such, appears to be a copyrighted screen capture though, possible copyright vio. — Ejfetters 02:08, 7 August 2007 (UTC).

Delete - improper licensing. Additionally, fair use is valid only when use is necessary, and it isn't, because the article is not a game guide. ALTON .ıl 02:33, 7 August 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.

Image:Football Stadium.jpg[edit]

Image:Football Stadium.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Coasterbill42 (notify | contribs).

Claimed as public domain, but the image is an aerial shot. Therefore I have a hard time believing this is PD-self. User has a history of uploading photos with incorrect tags. — Fang Aili ^talk 02:41, 7 August 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Stop being so freaking mean, Fang. My friend took that photo from his fathers personal aircraft while he was flying around the stadium. He gave it to be to upload on here because it's an awesome picture. I'd also like to know what history I have?

Keep Assume good faith. No reason to assume its not PD --Knulclunk 04:58, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The metadata helps to lend some credence to this being a personal photo, and on a quick search, I can't find it anywhere on the internet. The name kinda sucks, though, but that's certainly no grounds for deletion. --fuzzy510 20:27, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kept pending OTRS confirmation. howcheng {chat} 18:27, 16 August 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:Dennis&SanPedroDeSaño.jpg[edit]

Image:Dennis&SanPedroDeSaño.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Dennis L. Siluk (notify | contribs).

copy of Image:Example.png- — User:ACupOfCoffee @ 02:42, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Erotica64vh.jpg[edit]

Image:Erotica64vh.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Mrlopez2681 (notify | contribs).

The source of this image is unclear, as is its copyright status. This could clearly be replaced with a screen cap of the music video in question, as done with the Justify my Love video. — Ejfetters 03:04, 7 August 2007 (UTC).
Just what exactly would make the source info more "clear"? What is unclear about this - © Warner Bros. 1992 - with regards to copyright status? I am puzzled. -- Mrlopez2681 07:26, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just saying Copyright 1992 Warner Bros does not mean thats correct. We should have to have concrete proof of the original source and copyright holder of the image, and permission to use it here. Copyright Warner Bros, looks like a photographer, are you sure the photographer that took the images does not hold any rights to it? Again, I think we should have a clear concrete source and copyright holder on this, and permission to publish it here in Wikipedia. A screen cap from the music video, as done in countless music videos throughout Wikipedia would be no less satisfactory, and would actually be an image of the subject in question, instead of promotional material for the subject. Also, the video will always remain, the clear original source and copyright holder(s) will always be verifiable. Ejfetters 09:01, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
We have a clear copyright source and owner. This is clearly identified in the image as a promotional press card, (C) Warner Bros. Records 1992. That is entirely likely to be the case. We don't need "permission to publish it here" -- we're claiming fair use, not a licence. But I am not sure a gallery of 7 such images on Erotica (album) can be justified. No problem with the single image on Madonna's controversies though. Jheald 11:49, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree the images on the Erotica album page aren't necessary, didn't know about them, and nominated them as well. A video screencap can more easily visualize what the subject is talking about, than an publicity image for the video/album. Use a screencap instead. Ejfetters 03:13, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Delete. No commentary is offered on this advertising device and the album cover is more than sufficient for Madonna's controversies. howcheng {chat} 18:34, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Htmarket 1934 855864370.jpg[edit]

Image:Htmarket 1934 855864370.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Mrlopez2681 (notify | contribs).

The source of this image is unclear, as is its copyright status. This could be better replaced with the book cover which would be easier to verify the copyright and source information — Ejfetters 03:11, 7 August 2007 (UTC).
I don't know. It's a pretty great image. Surely some sort of fair use can be written for it? --Knulclunk 04:59, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have added an extremely detailed explanation as to the source of poster and the image of it. It must be noted that a cover of the book is already uploaded onto wikipedia and used in the article concerning Madonna's book Sex. Verifying the copyright status of this poster is not difficult at all. It is a copyright of Warner Books, as is the book Sex. -- Mrlopez2681 07:17, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete What purpose does the poster serve that the cover of the book cannot? The cover of the book is the actual subject in question, this is just an advertisement for the book, and nothing controversial about this is listed. Furthermore, the cover of the book would always be there, always be verifiable source material, and copyright status. The clear original source of this poster is unknown. The clear original source of the book cover is. And as you already said, if the book cover is already uploaded to wikipedia, why do we need the poster. Whether or not it is a good image does not constitute keeping the image. Ejfetters 08:56, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
- Furthermore, you stated in the fair use rationale that since the poster is your property, the images on it are your property too, this is incorrect. You can buy a copyrighted poster, but the image is not yours to publish however you want. You can buy a CD, but the music is not yours to publish or broadcast at your discression. I think what we need is permission from the copyright holder of the poster to use it in this page. Ejfetters 08:58, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Keep. We're claiming fair use. Fair use is what you can do without the publisher's permission. The subject matter of the article Madonna's controversies is the controversies in Madonna's image and self-marketing. The use of this image, designed to be displayed poster-sized at point of sale in bookshops, is highly appropriate to increase the reader's understanding by illustrating exactly how Madonna's image was being put over -- in a much more direct way than the significantly more tame cover of the book. Its use is encyclopedic, and clearly in balance with NFCC #2. Clearly also justified on Sex (book). -- Jheald 12:10, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Image is not necessary to discuss the book, and the overly complicated source information isn't verifiable. No need to keep it. --Abu badali ^(talk) 21:07, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP The article discusses more than just the book. The overly complicated source info isnt verifiable? (BTW - It was suggested above that the source info was unclear, so I gave an explanation that is VERY clear) In what way would my source info be any more or less verifiable than if I were to make a scan of the book cover? The same people who designed and created the book designed and created the poster. Jheald's explanation is right on the money.

So what exactly do you want as CLEAR VERIFIABLE SOURCE INFORMATION?' The person who designed the poster? The photographer? Im really not understanding what the problem is here - this debate is ridiculous. Mrlopez2681 03:12, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- Yes and yes. If they hold the copyright. You said your source info is very clear, all it elaborates on is that YOU own the poster, and the image, like I said before, you do not own the images on it, in no way more than I own the music on a CD I own, or the motion picture on a DVD I own. Ejfetters 03:16, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

- - changed the explanation. check it out. Mrlopez2681 03:35, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No commentary on the marketing of the book or this specific advertisement is offered anywhere in the article. As such, it is not required for reader understanding. howcheng {chat} 18:32, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ttwlg2.jpg[edit]

Image:Ttwlg2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by OperativePhrase (notify | contribs).

Music video closeup. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 04:03, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for use with commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." For video commentary only. --Knulclunk 03:36, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ywtvid5.jpg[edit]

Image:Ywtvid5.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Charmed36 (notify | contribs).

Music video closeup. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 04:04, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Appropriately illustrates the distinctive look of the video. Jheald 12:22, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- 'Delete - The "distinctive look" is not discussed in the article (but if you plan to add such discussion, make sure it's not original research). --Abu badali ^(talk) 21:28, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - single screenshot of a copyrighted video used in segment about the video. Textbook example of meeting NFCC8 - any television programme, movie, music video and so on justifies a single screenshot (multiples maybe, maybe not). Wily D 21:22, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for use with commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." For video commentary only. --Knulclunk 03:36, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The point is, there's no "critical commentary" about the video on the article (let alone one that needs this image to be understood). There's just a plot summary. --Abu badali ^(talk) 21:43, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Twentyforeplayscreenshot.JPG[edit]

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

Music video closeup. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 04:05, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Appropriately illustrates the manner in which the promo was given a 1950s look and styling. Jheald 12:18, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for use with commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." For video commentary only. --Knulclunk 03:36, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Gtig_vid.jpg[edit]

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

Music video closeup. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 04:05, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Appropriately illustrates the identified 60s/70s ambience of the video, and its distinctive visual style. Jheald 12:24, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for use with commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." For video commentary only. --Knulclunk 03:36, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Gdvid1.jpg[edit]

Image:Gdvid1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Charmed36 (notify | contribs).

Music video closeup. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 04:06, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Illustrates the artist's look and styling in this video. Jheald 12:27, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for use with commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." For video commentary only. --Knulclunk 03:36, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Afyvid1.jpg[edit]

Image:Afyvid1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Charmed36 (notify | contribs).

Music video closeup. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 04:07, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for use with commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." For video commentary only. --Knulclunk 03:36, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Soagvid.jpg[edit]

Image:Soagvid.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Charmed36 (notify | contribs).

Music video closeup. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 04:07, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Appropriately illustrates the dark feel chosen for the video, and Jackson's less than bubblegum glamorous styling. Jheald 12:34, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for use with commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." For video commentary only. --Knulclunk 03:36, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ands_vid.jpg[edit]

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

Music video closeup. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 04:08, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for use with commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." For video commentary only. --Knulclunk 03:36, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Jalwvid4.jpg[edit]

Image:Jalwvid4.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Charmed36 (notify | contribs).

Music video closeup. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 04:08, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Appropriately shows the out-of-focus through the viewfinder style chosen for parts of the promo, and Jackson's persona for the clip. Jheald 12:40, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for use with commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." For video commentary only. --Knulclunk 03:36, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Boy_ineedyou.jpg[edit]

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

Music video closeup. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 04:21, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep shows Carey's styling for the clip, Japanese-style salaryman office environment background, butterfly motifs. Jheald 13:07, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Are all of these things discussed in the article? Is this discussion sourced, or just original research? --Abu badali ^(talk) 20:54, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for use with commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." For video commentary only. --Knulclunk 03:30, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Brandy_wis2u.jpg[edit]

Image:Brandy_wis2u.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Noboyo (notify | contribs).

Music video closeup. Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 04:35, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Tonnyandtanya.JPG[edit]

Image:Tonnyandtanya.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Vaz21 (notify | contribs).

Orphaned, certainly Unencyclopedic, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tonny and tanya Core desat 05:39, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:PrestonNOISEdepartment.jpg[edit]

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

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, possible Copyright violation, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Preston NOISE Department Core desat 05:56, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:EFF4.jpg[edit]

Image:EFF4.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by PaulLatimer (notify | contribs).

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Desolation's Angels Core desat 06:18, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:ILuvJohn.jpg[edit]

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

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, potential Copyright violation, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Desolation's Angels Core desat 06:18, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Universe.png[edit]

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

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Desolation's Angels Core desat 06:18, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ben stiller.jpg[edit]

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

Same user (Sfghdsfg) keeps on uploading same image, even though it has been deleted twice. User inappropriately inserted it into Ben Stiller article. DearPrudence 06:34, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh gee, this is recreated content is it not? I'll just delete. (See the general criteria for deletion) —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 04:14, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Playboymansion.jpg[edit]

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

LQ, image is blurry and out of focus. — Zzyzx11 (Talk) 07:54, 7 August 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Image:Cporpreorder2.jpg[edit]

Image:Cporpreorder2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by AnujSuper9 (notify | contribs).

User claims he owns the image, but the image, quite frankly, looks like a promo image put out by the company for its product. The image includes copyrighted video game covers that are certainly not free use. Possible copyright vio.? — Ejfetters 08:39, 7 August 2007 (UTC).
Looks like he put the wrong tag on it by accident. Use appears to be appropriate on Castlevania:_Portrait_of_Ruin. Re-tag and Keep ? Jheald 13:13, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In that case it would be replaceable. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 14:13, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Simpleplan.png[edit]

Image:Simpleplan.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Ian Lee (notify | contribs).

First - image is hardly worth for the page of the subject, surely someone can go on Flickr per say and find an image to use, I searched there and found plenty images of the band. Second, it is, in the user's own words, a "copy" of a copyrighted single, this seems like a copyright violation. — Ejfetters 09:11, 7 August 2007 (UTC).

Oppose. Just because you don't think it is worth it is not a reason for deletion. And the creator says it is "based on" another image, NOT copied. Creators are inspired by each other all the time. That doesn't equal a copyvio.--Wehwalt 09:39, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Now orphaned, and a better replacement (a photograph rather than a non-notable "caricature") can certainly be (and has been?) found. I also agree with emphasis that the copyright status is dubious. It's clearly a derivative work, and it might be fair use if we're lucky, and it certainly can't be put under a GNU license. EldKatt (Talk) 13:25, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Sure the image isn't great, but it was only put there as a temporary filler as everything we try gets deleted instantaneously. We can not get a free image as the band has not been on tour for a whole year and a half. The only free images available are those with only a couple of the band members. And as for it being based off something, what's wrong with that? It's not like I ran the image through a filter. I actually took time to redraw it, and artists and musicians do that all the time. This deletion is absolutely ridiculous. — Ian Lee (Talk) 18:33, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Please read up on copyright law. Googling "derivative work" and "fair use" is a good start. EldKatt (Talk) 20:03, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Exactly! My version is "majorly" different from the original in terms of color, shape, and style. It qualifies to be new work in it of itself. — Ian Lee (Talk) 20:46, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - But you started from the original, making it a derivative work and therefore illegal because you don't have the express permission of the copyright holder. howcheng {chat} 21:59, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      - No! It's okay if you "majorly" alter it. And I'm positive that my redrawing is much more altered than this picture which is in the commons! — Ian Lee (Talk) 23:47, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        Just replace it with a free use image, even if it isn't the best. It doesn't need a placeholder, there are plenty of biographical articles without "placeholder" drawn images. If a free use photo of the band cannot be found then it can be left blank. Ejfetters 05:36, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
        So your logic is that because we can't find a free photo with the whole band, we should just have no image? My drawn image explains A LOT more about how they look like than no photo. I'm replacing my image back into the article because for the current one, you cannot even see their faces and Chuck isn't even in it! — Ian Lee (Talk) 06:13, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is pointless, the image is not encyclopedic, do you want to draw images for every biographical listing without an image? If there is no free image found, then yes, it should be left blank, WP:FU - All this could be solved by simply looking up for a free use image. There's an image on Maroon 5's page that I dont think is very good, but its there unless someone else uploads another. Lifehouse has no image until someone uploads one. Just because there isn't an image there doesn't mean we can violate policy. Ejfetters 09:27, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
It's not my job to explain to anyone how copyright law works, and I have far better things than that to spend my time on, so please just take my word for it: This is not a free image. It is a derivative work, not in any way an original work, and at the moment incorrectly tagged because I'm fairly sure the original photo wasn't under GNU FDL. Legally, this is no better than any photo--if anything, it's even more tricky to categorize. Deal with it. EldKatt (Talk) 09:56, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you, enough said, my case is closed. Let the admins decide. Ejfetters 11:23, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
When you say you re-drew it, did you copy or trace over an existing photo? If you did that's a derivative work of a copyrighted photo, and not free use. If you did your own caricature or portrait inspired by, but not copied from, copyrighted sources then it's entirely original and you're free to release it to the public domain or under a fair license. People can argue about whether or not Wikipedia should use sketches, but at any rate that's not a non-free use issue. Unfortunately (for anyone who wants an image), the policy and guidelines here are pretty clear, that copyrighted photographs of living individuals including bands that are still active, should not be used merely because you haven't found a free image. They may not tour this year but they could tour next year, and if not here someone could take a picture of their appearance in some other country. Sometimes it's hard to get a good free use picture and you have to be patient, but difficulty doesn't justify using a non-free image. If the band breaks up or announces they will never again appear in public, then you have a stronger argument. With all that in mind, I agree to delete unless it turns out that this is not a derivative work Wikidemo 19:42, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The key is replaceability. "Hard to replace" is not the same as "irreplaceable". The stance of policy is that, in a situation where a free image could be obtained, we would prefer no image over a non-free one. Delete. (ESkog)^(Talk) 22:33, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Along with the copyright issues, Simple Plan is not a virtual band, so the image is inaccurate and misleading. 17Drew 05:27, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:X1020.jpg[edit]

Image:X1020.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Lukechastityplay (notify | contribs).

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 10:33, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Also, the visible copyright watermark makes the uploader's ability to license it as GFDL dubious. -Seidenstud 14:11, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:9583.jpg[edit]

Image:9583.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Lukechastityplay (notify | contribs).

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 10:33, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Also, the visible copyright watermark makes the uploader's ability to license it as GFDL dubious. -Seidenstud 14:11, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:9299.jpg[edit]

Image:9299.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Lukechastityplay (notify | contribs).

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 10:33, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Also, the visible copyright watermark makes the uploader's ability to license it as GFDL dubious. -Seidenstud 14:12, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:9197.jpg[edit]

Image:9197.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Lukechastityplay (notify | contribs).

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 10:33, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Also, the visible copyright watermark makes the uploader's ability to license it as GFDL dubious. -Seidenstud 14:11, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Image-Fink01.jpg[edit]

Image:Image-Fink01.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Greenwych (notify | contribs).

Orphaned as a result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bob Fink (2nd_nomination). Not useful outside of that article. EldKatt (Talk) 12:43, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Andrewbrel.jpg[edit]

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

UE, OR. Used on now-deleted page. — Calton | Talk 12:57, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Gcouch_img.jpg[edit]

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

UE, OR. Used on now-deleted page. — Calton | Talk 12:57, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Mr.Satish.jpg[edit]

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

UE, OR. Used on now-deleted page. — Calton | Talk 12:57, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:John-Anthony-Hartman.jpg[edit]

Image:John-Anthony-Hartman.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Websage (notify | contribs).

UE, OR. Used on now-deleted page. — Calton | Talk 12:57, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:1360137468_l.jpg[edit]

Image:1360137468_l.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Andrewgoold (notify | contribs).

UE, OR. Used on now-deleted page. — Calton | Talk 12:57, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:LEONID_11_POST.jpg[edit]

Image:LEONID_11_POST.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by De Varen (notify | contribs).

Orphaned Videmus Omnia ^Talk 14:51, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:MAZAWATTEE_TEA_NEW_X_1.jpg[edit]

Image:MAZAWATTEE_TEA_NEW_X_1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Kenharman (notify | contribs).

Orphaned. Unencyclopedic Videmus Omnia ^Talk 14:54, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Crop and Reduce. Smaller, and without the red border, it would be appropriate for use on Mazawattee Tea Company, to show the company's New Cross building opened in 1901. Jheald 15:14, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I'd like to get some confirmation that uploader is copyright holder, as a previous version was deleted as replaceable fair use. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 15:24, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - I thought it was deleted as a duplicate, not rfu. The uploader is just starting out here, so we shouldn't bite the newbie more than we can help. This seems to me a straightforward picture, of a building which is still standing. Nothing similar comes out of a Google image search. So I don't see any great reason why this shouldn't be the uploader's own work. WP:AGF, no? Jheald 20:50, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Nantawanpano.gif[edit]

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

Orphaned, suspected unfree image (a previously-deleted version was labeled as copyrighted). Videmus Omnia ^Talk 15:02, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:GML.jpg[edit]

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

Music video closeup - delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 15:07, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Brandy_at_avn_fixed.jpg[edit]

Image:Brandy_at_avn_fixed.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Harrism84 (notify | contribs).

Orphaned, censored copy of Image:Brandy at avn.jpg Fritz S. (Talk) 15:12, 7 August 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:

Image:Riskanalysis.jpg[edit]

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

Orphaned, no good source. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 15:30, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Orignal upload claimed to release it for non-commercial use only and "I work for the company that my page is for. I hav the right to use this and any other pictures I have uploaded.". The image was deleted. It has since been reuploaded and now that uploader claims its from a nasa webpage, without providing a link. Delete --Gmaxwell 15:36, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment OTRS received at email from a person employed by NASA stating that the image was created entirely by NASA personnel so is PD. They did upload incorrectly before (noncom). They would also like to remain anonymous, and the image is not published online. - cohesion 02:45, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Move to commons -Nard 21:53, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
source, BTW humblefool ® 01:15, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, I guess it is online after all... :) - cohesion 02:52, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kept. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 14:22, 20 August 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:Popper Magee book cover.jpg[edit]

Image:Popper Magee book cover.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Lumos3 (notify | contribs).

CV. Not used in article discussing the book. — Lara ♥Love 15:48, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Antidote_for_Irony_screenshot.jpg[edit]

Image:Antidote_for_Irony_screenshot.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by TBSfan1223 (notify | contribs).

Music video closeup - delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding in a way words cannot. Also currently orphaned. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 16:14, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Yakata-all.jpg[edit]

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

Orphaned, Absent uploader, possibly wrong license. Fritz S. (Talk) 16:21, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:JeanPaulSartre.jpg[edit]

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

Unclear source. There were some inconclusive discussion about its source back in 2005. No progress. Abu badali ^(talk) 18:49, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Jean_Genet-1983.jpg[edit]

Image:Jean_Genet-1983.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Max543 (notify | contribs).

Image tagged as PD-self, but description implies fair use. Abu badali ^(talk) 18:59, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
From the IPO conference archive (Dec 1993). Uploader may very well have authority to release it. Suggest we check with the organisation; meanwhile wait until we know more. Jheald 19:42, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:PSSPUJCAXPNU8LCA2DD365CAZZF3G9CA6T2908CA7QOEF9CAF1RCU0CATW9DY0CA04T3DVCANBK6OMCAOCZOJNCA7WWT1HCAE6K3POCA8WL45UCACNWBQ2CASA9MN8CAWP04GACA0INT60CA2KPTBMCA4C4WZ3.jpg[edit]

Image:PSSPUJCAXPNU8LCA2DD365CAZZF3G9CA6T2908CA7QOEF9CAF1RCU0CATW9DY0CA04T3DVCANBK6OMCAOCZOJNCA7WWT1HCAE6K3POCA8WL45UCACNWBQ2CASA9MN8CAWP04GACA0INT60CA2KPTBMCA4C4WZ3.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Rockj97 (notify | contribs).

Orphaned Oli Filth 19:02, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - invasive name ALTON .ıl 20:58, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- Comment: What do you mean by "invasive"? That's exactly how I would have called it!! :P --Abu badali ^(talk) 21:43, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I say we should just rename it to a longer name, the name isn't long enough, hehehe, just kidding, delete, its an orphan too, what is this anyways?

Image:SCNL-accreditation-Hans_Koechler-2000.jpg[edit]

Image:SCNL-accreditation-Hans_Koechler-2000.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Max543 (notify | contribs).

Tagged as PD-self, but descripion implies by-permission. Abu badali ^(talk) 19:03, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Likely to be in Dr Koechler's personal possession. Uploader may very well have authority to release it. Suggest we check with the I-P-O organisation; meanwhile wait until we know more. It is possible WP:COI may also be an issue. Jheald 19:42, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Deleted, Commons image showing. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 14:26, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Koechler-dahab-1988.jpg[edit]

Image:Koechler-dahab-1988.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Max543 (notify | contribs).

Orphan, tagged as PD-self, but description implies it was downloaded from somewhere. Abu badali ^(talk) 19:04, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
From the IPO conference archive (June 1988). Uploader may very well have authority to release it. Suggest we check with the organisation; meanwhile wait until we know more. Jheald 19:42, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Qattan-balogun.jpg[edit]

Image:Qattan-balogun.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Max543 (notify | contribs).

Orphan, tagged as PD-self, but description implies it was downloaded from somewhere Abu badali ^(talk) 19:05, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
From the IPO conference archive (Nov 1981). Uploader may very well have authority to release it. Suggest we check with the organisation; meanwhile wait until we know more. Jheald 19:53, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Adam_schaff-koechler-1980.jpg[edit]

Image:Adam_schaff-koechler-1980.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Max543 (notify | contribs).

tagged as pd-self, but description implies it was downloaded from the internet Abu badali ^(talk) 19:07, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
From the IPO "President's snapshots" archive (Aug 1980). Uploader may very well have authority to release it. Suggest we check with the organisation; meanwhile wait until we know more. Jheald 19:42, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Koechler-kreisky-1980.jpg[edit]

Image:Koechler-kreisky-1980.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Max543 (notify | contribs).

tagged as pd-self, but description implies it was downloaded from the internet Abu badali ^(talk) 19:09, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
From the IPO conference archive (Nov 1980). Uploader may very well have authority to release it. Suggest we check with the organisation; meanwhile wait until we know more. Jheald 19:57, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:John_ramsey_jonbenet.jpg[edit]

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

This TV screenshot is attempt at circumventing copyright. It's from CNN and shows a picture of JonBenét Ramsey prominently in order to depict her. However, no discussion of John Ramsey's appearance on CNN is in the article, and even if there were, this screenshot would be necessary to understanding the idea that he was interviewed on CNN. howcheng {chat} 19:59, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Playboy_December_2002.jpg[edit]

Image:Playboy_December_2002.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Tony619 (notify | contribs).

Non-free magazine cover being used to show appearance of the model. Delete per WP:NFCC#1 and WP:NFCC#8 - does not increase readers' understanding in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 20:04, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I think these images enhance the article, and are likely to be perfectly acceptable as "fair use" not just by us, but by any downstream commencial republisher of our page as well. The image clearly adds to the readers understanding by showing how she was portrayed on the cover of Playboy - what image it was that was spread over umpteen newsstands. We're not using this as the primary image of what she looks like; we're using it as a representative image of how she has commercialised herself. That is entirely appropriate. Jheald 20:19, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - what exactly the cover image was isn't important here. The specific image didn't generate any controversy (or something like that). That it's legal fair use for us and for others is not enough reason to keep the image. Just like we don't keep any non-free image that "enhance the article". The image must be necessary for the understanding of the text information; --Abu badali ^(talk) 20:31, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - No, that's not what NFCC #8 says, as you know as well as I do. The image must "significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic". The topic here substantially is Ms von Teese's public image. So showing exactly how that image is commercially presented is entirely appropriate to increase readers' understanding of the topic. Jheald 20:42, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The Dita Von Teese article refers specifically to this cover, as it was an important point in Von Teese's career. Aside from that it was her first Playboy cover, and she received far more media attention than she had previously enjoyed as a consequence, it was also a typo on this cover that gave her her last name. This is a story often repeated throughout mainstream media, in addition to appearing Von Teese's own book, and without the image to accompany it the story becomes somewhat redundant. Suzarella 00:52, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Is a picture of the cover necessary to state that? It seems that could be expressed in words, as you just did. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 01:33, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As the cover is the subject of a portion of the article, is clear for fair use. See WP:NFC Example 7:...if that cover itself is notable enough to be a topic within the article, then "fair use" may apply --Knulclunk 02:32, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The cover isn't the topic (unlike Demi Moore) - the model is. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 03:06, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - I disagree, the cover is the topic. Even solely as a curiosity, the image illustrates (if such a thing is possible) a typographical error that became the model's name. It's not just for illustrating the model herself.Suzarella 14:46, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - in this case I don't think words alone do an adequate job. -- DS1953 ^talk 05:12, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I just received two professional free photos of her - Image:SDG Von Teese 1.jpg and Image:SDG Von Teese 2.jpg. Should be able to use these free images to replace the non-free ones. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 20:32, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Marvellous effort, thank you very much. However, I do think there still is reason for keeping the Playboy image. Suzarella 18:49, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:BurlesqueAndtheArtoftheTeese.jpg[edit]

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

Book cover being used primarily to decorate the article about the author. Delete per WP:NFCC#8. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 20:06, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Again, as a promotional book cover, this image is likely to be perfectly acceptable as "fair use" not just by us, but by any downstream commencial republisher of our page as well. "Burlesque" is central to the image Ms von Teese has defined for herself. This image shows the image of herself she evidently believes best expresses that, as well as serving as the primary visual identification for her book. Again, we're not using this as the primary image of what she looks like; we're using this, alongside the Playboy image, to accurately convey the commercial image she has consciously created for herself. That is not something that could be substituted by a free snapshot. Jheald 20:32, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The burlesque image is important to have, because this is Von Teese's profession; both she and the media refer to her as a burlesque dancer before any of her other interests. Additionally, the burlesque section really should be illustrated, as it is still a somewhat obscure art form, but people who've never heard of burlesque would know of Von Teese. It is not simply an image of the author herself, but of what has helped make her famous. Fair Use images of Von Teese are few and far between, and images of her burlesque shows themselves are often of very poor quality. In my opinion there is no satisfactory replacement for the image. Suzarella 00:43, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The accompanying text doesn't really contain any critical review of the book cover or the book. Keeping a non-free image here only makes it more unlikely that we will get a free image. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 01:36, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - One doesn't really effect the other. If a satisfactory free image is found, the fair use one can easily be replaced. The book cover does also picture Von Teese's feather fans, "the biggest in the world", which the article does refer to. If a lines such as 'as illustrated on the cover of her book' inserted in the article would make the image more pertinent then I'm sure such lines could be added. I'm keen to keep this image over most, however, as it is a careful image, chosen by Von Teese herself as the main representation of her style of burlesque. A blurred and darkened image from one of her shows cannot capture this. Suzarella 14:52, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment - unfortunately Wikipedia doesn't allow for non-free pictures to be used "until a free one is found". If there is any possibility of a free image being obtained, then a non-free should not be used. As it is, one could reasonably expect a free image of this person to be released - even one which portrays her as a burlesque dancer. Anrie 08:41, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - As I said above, we're not using this as the primary image to show what she looks like -- rather, we're using this to accurately convey the commercial image she has consciously created for herself. Jheald 11:40, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      - Why couldn't a free image be made or obtained to show that? Videmus Omnia ^Talk 11:58, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I got in touch with Steve Diet Goedde, one of her photographers - sounds like he's willing to contribute some free images of her, keep your fingers crossed. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 22:32, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I just received two professional free photos of her - Image:SDG Von Teese 1.jpg and Image:SDG Von Teese 2.jpg. Should be able to use these free images to replace the non-free ones. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 20:33, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Videmus Omnia. I admire your effort in keeping Wikipedia free. Anrie 07:25, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Kubuntuvbox.png[edit]

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

Orphaned non-free image. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 20:13, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Brian_Johnson_Steven_Tyler.jpeg[edit]

Image:Brian_Johnson_Steven_Tyler.jpeg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by ProhibitOnions (notify | contribs).

Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not significantly increase readers' understanding in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 21:59, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:MikeMuscat.jpg[edit]

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

Orphan — Girolamo Savonarola 22:11, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:JillKimmel.jpg[edit]

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

Orphan — Girolamo Savonarola 22:11, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:IvyIacono.jpg[edit]

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

Orphan — Girolamo Savonarola 22:11, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:MikeMuscat.JPG[edit]

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

Orphan — Girolamo Savonarola 22:11, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:JillKimmel.JPG[edit]

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

Orphan — Girolamo Savonarola 22:11, 7 August 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:

Image:ImageNotes.jpg[edit]

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

Poor quality non-free image used only in project space. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 22:20, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for obvious reasons. I'm amazed this has been nominated for deletion. Please look at how the image is used, what it is, where it is used, and what it's used for. Zocky | picture popups 22:47, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep appropriate for purpose. WP can't infringe its own copyright, and the use of the Firefox logo is entirely incidental, not significant. No copyright problem here. Jheald 07:10, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Sorry, it's a non-free image not used in any articles. It's a clear violation of NFCC#7. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 14:16, 20 August 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:Brie-Larson-SheSaid1.jpg[edit]

Image:Brie-Larson-SheSaid1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Brookezyn (notify | contribs).

Music video closeup. Delete per WP:NFCC#8; does not significantly increase readers' understanding in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 22:23, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Used commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." Keep for video commentary only. --Knulclunk 03:24, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Press cards for Erotica album by Madonna[edit]

Image:Erotica2iq.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Mrlopez2681 (notify | contribs).

Image:Erotica22fp.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Mrlopez2681 (notify | contribs).

Image:Erotica31ay.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Mrlopez2681 (notify | contribs).

Image:Erotica41lx.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Mrlopez2681 (notify | contribs).

Image:Erotica56ec.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Mrlopez2681 (notify | contribs).

Image:Erotica70bn.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Mrlopez2681 (notify | contribs).

Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding in a way words cannot. This isn't necessary, and isn't discussed in the article at all. The album cover image should suffice. Ejfetters 22:48, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
I think showing how the album was publicised - with these notably hard-edged images - is a valuable addition to the article. But WP is not in the business of galleries of non-free content. Keep only one or two at most. Jheald 07:26, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all. I would say keep one if it were accompanied by some discussion about the marketing of the book, but there isn't any, so these are really only decorative. howcheng {chat} 17:27, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Kjhgkjgk.JPG[edit]

Image:Kjhgkjgk.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Mrlopez2681 (notify | contribs).

Delete per WP:NFCC#8, does not increase readers' understanding in a way words cannot. This isn't necessary, we don't really need to have an image, then a reverse negative of the same image, this can be communicated through words easily. Ejfetters 22:48, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:George July06.jpg[edit]

Image:George July06.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Burty1 (notify | contribs).

Orphaned pet photo, uploaded for Beagle — Bigr Tex 22:51, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:George2007 129s.jpg[edit]

Image:George2007 129s.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Burty1 (notify | contribs).

Orphaned pet photo — Bigr Tex 22:51, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:April 2007 026s.jpg[edit]

Image:April 2007 026s.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Burty1 (notify | contribs).

Orphaned pet photo — Bigr Tex 22:51, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Puffy Feb 2006 small.JPG[edit]

Image:Puffy Feb 2006 small.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Burty1 (notify | contribs).

Orphaned pet photo, uploaded for Tetraodontidae — Bigr Tex 22:51, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Big O Dec 2005.jpg[edit]

Image:Big O Dec 2005.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Burty1 (notify | contribs).

Orphaned pet photo, uploaded for Ancient dog breeds — Bigr Tex 22:51, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:RSAT.jpg[edit]

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

Orphaned, Absent uploader, watermarked Bigr Tex 22:54, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Brokenhearted_(screenshot).jpg[edit]

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

Music video closeup - delete per WP:NFCC#8; does not significantly increase readers' understanding in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 22:55, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Used commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." Keep for video commentary only. --Knulclunk 03:16, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:AngelusLiam.jpg[edit]

Image:AngelusLiam.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by MicMacNac75962 (notify | contribs).

Orphaned, Absent uploader, watermarked Bigr Tex 22:56, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Brook_shadowmusicv.jpg[edit]

Image:Brook_shadowmusicv.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Mahogany h00r (notify | contribs).

Music video closeup - delete per WP:NFCC#8; does not significantly increase readers' understanding in a way words cannot. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 23:06, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Used commentary as permitted by WP:NFC#Examples of acceptable use: Film and television screen shots:"For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." Keep for video commentary only. --Knulclunk 03:22, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image deleted. Headshot of Fraser that is of no significance to the article. -Nv8200p talk 12:41, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:ThinkFluent Logo.jpeg[edit]

Absent uploader, only contribution, orphaned. Author may or may not actually be license holder. The Evil Spartan 23:48, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]