Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2008 March 10
March 10
[edit]
- - uploaded by Kalana_drmz (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 23:18, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 23:20, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Copyright violation, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 23:20, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Rawrimamole (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Nv8200p talk 23:23, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Coachfortner (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 23:23, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Newswire79 (notify | contribs).
- Auto listing incomplete IfD, image is orphaned. BJBot (talk) 00:27, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Kurdomanic (notify | contribs).
- Unused, no context for encyclopedic use. —Bkell (talk) 00:37, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by RyLouArtig (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 01:04, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Truckdrivertraining (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader, Advertisement Nv8200p talk 01:05, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Prolific_lee (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 01:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Copyright violation Nv8200p talk 01:08, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 01:51, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Rifckyutomo (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 01:51, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 01:52, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Fireblaster_lyz (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Copyright violation Nv8200p talk 02:02, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 02:03, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 02:04, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 02:05, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Copyright violation, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 02:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 02:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Cardsplayer4life (notify | contribs).
- This image is a parody of South Park depicting college football coaches of the Southeastern Conference as if they were South Park characters. While it's very well done, it's probably inappropriate on several levels. (1) Depicting Nick Saban holding bags of money has obvious BLP issues. (2) As a derivative of South Park and of several school logos, it's questionable whether this meets our licensing needs. (3) The statement in the article concerning parodies is unsourced. B (talk) 02:07, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- I made the image, and it has been used widely on blogs, message boards, etc. I can understand that there might be some objections to it, but parody is a protected form of expression, so I don't think there should be a legal issue with it. Nonetheless, if it is removed it will be ok with me, as I don't want it to cause any problems for wikipedia. Sources for parodies of South Park should not be hard to find, as they are widely used and available. Cardsplayer4life (talk) 01:16, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Simple fancruft and nothing more. Definitely doesn't belong around here. Jmlk17 01:08, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Adds little to no value to the article. Yonisyuumei (talk) 03:43, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Denzillacey (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 02:08, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Absent uploader, Advertisement Nv8200p talk 02:10, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Absent uploader, Probably Copyright violation Nv8200p talk 02:22, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Wangtopgun (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 02:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 02:26, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Matthew_McAllister (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 02:30, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Randhirreddy (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned Nv8200p talk 02:36, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Superparadoxx (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned, Copyright violation, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 02:38, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by LovelyAri07 (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 02:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 02:42, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 02:46, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Jordandidcott (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 02:46, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Copyright violation, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 02:48, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Copyright violation, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 02:48, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Copyright violation, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 02:49, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Copyright violation, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 02:49, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Copyright violation, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 02:52, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- I believe that original photo is still copyrighted Trixt (talk) 03:10, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Bolekpolivka (notify | contribs).
- No source or proof of license. -Nard 03:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Uploader changed license and added info and removed ifd tag. Still no proof of license and sourcing doesn't add up. -Nard 21:48, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
- No evidence provided to support the uploader's claims -Nv8200p talk 17:13, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
- Uploader changed license and added info and removed ifd tag. Still no proof of license and sourcing doesn't add up. -Nard 21:48, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Al_Ameer_son (notify | contribs).
- Even assuming the licensing is correct, it has only been twenty years since 1988, not 25 as the license requires. -Nard 03:14, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Al_Ameer_son (notify | contribs).
- The license for this image on Flickr is non-commercial only, which is not compatible with our free image policy. -Nard 03:16, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Had no idea. --Al Ameer son (talk) 19:13, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Al_Ameer_son (notify | contribs).
- It has not been 25 years since 1986, which is what the license requires for this image to be free. -Nard 03:19, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Damn... only three years away. --Al Ameer son (talk) 19:15, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Al_Ameer_son (notify | contribs).
- This photo was taken in Jordan, where is not yet PD (see {{PD-Jordan}}). There is no proof the copyright laws of Egypt would apply. -Nard 03:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- I'll replace the Egyptian license with the correct Jordan license, which releases it in PD. The Jordan license says if its published before 1979 it in PD. --Al Ameer son (talk) 19:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Not sure Jordanian copyright works here, I'm assuming Al Ahram Weekly indulged in "swiping" an image by an Israeli photographer. JaakobouChalk Talk 13:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
- Image kept. Nothing to suggest that image was by Israeli photographer so we'll go with the Jordanian copyright. -Nv8200p talk 17:17, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
- Not sure Jordanian copyright works here, I'm assuming Al Ahram Weekly indulged in "swiping" an image by an Israeli photographer. JaakobouChalk Talk 13:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Al_Ameer_son (notify | contribs).
- The PD tag used says 50 years since publication are required, but the image is from the 1970's. -Nard 03:26, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Al_Ameer_son (notify | contribs).
- I refuse to believe the copyright holder of this image is a German Wikipedian. -Nard 03:35, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- NVM, he links to Wikipedia on his website! -Nard 03:37, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- I don't understand, the author is a fraud? --Al Ameer son (talk) 19:12, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- I changed my mind, this one is ok. -Nard 23:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Commons image showing through. -Nv8200p talk 16:54, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
- I changed my mind, this one is ok. -Nard 23:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Al_Ameer_son (notify | contribs).
- 1982 is less than 50 years ago, which is what the tag requires. -Nard 03:40, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- However attribution is provided so the 50 year rule does not apply
- - uploaded by Filthysize (notify | contribs).
- Sourced to an unfree website. -Nard 04:13, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- OBSOLETE Original image for the article Mudd's Women – which was better quality – was removed for no good reason and replaced by this smaller, and IMO, crappier version. I returned the original image to the article, which was fine the way it was. Please get rid of this one. Cyberia23 (talk) 04:50, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by BoffoHijinx (notify | contribs).
- "The image is used to identify the organization Phil Hartman, a subject of public interest. The significance of the logo is to help the reader identify the organization, assure the reader they have reached the right article containing critical commentary about the organization, and illustrate the organization's intended branding message in a way that words alone could not convey."
Phil Hartman is not an organization, nor does this logo represent him in any way, shape, or form. The Phil Hartman article claims the subject designed this logo, albeit w/o any reliable sources; further, that is the extent of its discussion and usage in said article: "Hartman worked part time as a graphic artist, including designing album covers for popular rock bands. [To include] Crosby, Stills & Nash's logo." Fails WP:RS & WP:NFCC#1, 3a, and 8. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 05:37, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete. This is a boilerplate rationale that isn't even remotely applicable. —Bkell (talk) 02:43, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
- OB, better version here: EdifierLogo.png Vittau (talk) 06:18, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- New version, with correct copyright licensing here Vittau (talk) 06:22, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Possessing a copy of a photograph is not the same as owning the copyright for it. The photo was taken after 1923, so is still copyrighted. Alkivar doesn't have the right to put it under cc-by-sa Superm401 - Talk 06:32, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Keep published without a copyright notice. "Publication" is defined as giving copies to the public. See Publication#Copyright. -Nard 23:37, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Image kept per Nard. Image copyright tag changed accordingly. -Nv8200p talk 17:07, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
- This is just a cropped version of Image:Tedwilliams and tomyawkey.jpg and is non-free for the same reason. Superm401 - Talk 06:32, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Keep published without a copyright notice. -Nard 23:38, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Image kept per Nard. Image copyright tag changed accordingly. -Nv8200p talk 17:07, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
- Keep Image is cropped to highlight the subject(s), in this case Teddy Williams. Image is notable. sekhui (talk) 14:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- Low quality, orphaned, possibly non-free, better images of same object now available (Image:Kragujevac - V3.jpg) Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- orphaned, unencyclopedic, doubtful copyright status Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:07, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Simpsons contributor (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned, unclear and questionable license and source information Otterathome (talk) 11:43, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, unclear and questionable license and source information Otterathome (talk) 11:43, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- This appears to be a photo from Saddam's trial, making this PD-US-Gov. -Nard 23:08, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Why? Were all photos taken at Saddam's trial created by the United States federal government? —Bkell (talk) 02:40, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
- This appears to be a photo from Saddam's trial, making this PD-US-Gov. -Nard 23:08, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, unclear and questionable license and source information Otterathome (talk) 11:43, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Midnight 7 (notify | contribs).
- Only used in two user sub-pages, unclear and questionable license and source information Otterathome (talk) 11:46, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Tigriscuniculus (notify | contribs).
- CV: http://www.bodyworlds.com/en.html — pd_THOR | =/\= | 15:18, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- This image has been approved for use in Wikipedia by the Institute for Plastination, along with the others on the Body Worlds page Tigriscuniculus (talk) 16:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- With regards to this image, and the others I listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2008 March 10/Images: the IP may have approved their use on Wikipedia (although we would need a reliable source for that), but by using the licensing tag of {{GFDL-self}}, you're claiming that you're the copyright holder for these images and that you are re-licensing them under the GFDL. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 16:31, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- This image has been approved for use in Wikipedia by the Institute for Plastination, along with the others on the Body Worlds page Tigriscuniculus (talk) 16:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Rationaled to "[t]o illustrate the article about the movie". Unnecessary and does not significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, nor would its omission would be detrimental to that understanding; fails WP:NFCC#1, 3a, and 8. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 15:30, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, No source provided on which image is based. Nv8200p talk 16:56, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Nv8200p talk 17:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Elected1984 (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned, Copyright violation Nv8200p talk 17:08, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Elected1984 (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned, Copyright violation Nv8200p talk 17:09, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned, UnencyclopedicNv8200p talk 17:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)- What does Unencyclopedic mean?! SockPuppetForTomruen (talk) 20:48, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- An unencyclopedic image doesn't have any purpose within any encyclopedic articles. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 21:12, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- A strange judgement on a diagram that is a variation on another one that is in active use. SockPuppetForTomruen (talk) 21:38, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- Nomination withdrawn -17:20, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
- A strange judgement on a diagram that is a variation on another one that is in active use. SockPuppetForTomruen (talk) 21:38, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- An unencyclopedic image doesn't have any purpose within any encyclopedic articles. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 21:12, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Nv8200p talk 17:16, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Nv8200p talk 17:17, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=delete){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=history){kind=link}
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 17:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Orphaned Nv8200p talk 17:44, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Originally uploaded under the wrong license, apologies for any confusion. Rudget. 15:53, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Timpennington (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 17:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Quite encyclopedic if used properly, but can't really be used properly — the guy is altogether nonnotable. Plus, it appears to be a copyvio (professionally-done picture done by the uploader?). Nyttend (talk) 03:34, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Roger.smith (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 18:02, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Jlopez2022 (notify | contribs).
- Unencyclopedic school syllabus. Hut 8.5 18:46, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Unencyclopedic, orphaned, probable copyvio Hut 8.5 18:55, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Non-English scientific paper. Original research, probable copyvio. Hut 8.5 18:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Advertising, probable copyvio Hut 8.5 19:09, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Advertising, probable copyvio Hut 8.5 19:09, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Ben Sheppard (notify | contribs).
- While the image is tagged with a CC-by-sa 2.5 license, the description reads "..may be used or distributed freely ... as long as the purpose is non-commercial". Already contacted the uploader in June 2007 about it, but he never responded. The image has in the meantime been transferred to a few other Wikipedias as being CC-by-sa 2.5, and I noticed this catch yet again when I wanted to move it to the Commons. I can't do that in good faith, seeing as how the author clearly does not want his image to be used for commercial purposes. Should be removed as a non-free image. Anrie (talk) 19:19, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose. I doubt the user meant by "non-commercial" the image could not be used on Wikipedia, as he chose to uploaded the image TO Wikipedia. Many Wikipedians do not consider Wikipedia to be a commercial site. For the record, User:Bensheppard has not edited since May 9 2007 (Arnie's first attempt to contact him was in July 2007), and has no specified e-mail address. - BillCJ (talk) 19:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Comment: I agree the user did not mean the picture can't be used on Wikipedia, but Wikipedia certainly means that non-commercial images can't be used here. Per the Image use policy: Images which are listed as for non-commercial use only, by permission, or which restrict derivatives are unsuitable for Wikipedia and will be deleted on sight.. Anrie (talk) 05:04, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
- A user uploaded this image to illustrate Kancho. (See prior version of the article). While it's quite amusing, and I got a good laugh, it's an entirely unencyclopedic use of the Dalai Lama's image. Marc Kupper (talk) (contribs) 20:08, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- The image is probably a copyvio qualifies for speedy deletion - Google Images finds that this exact image was used to illustrate a news article though since publication of that article the original image been removed. Marc Kupper (talk) (contribs) 22:15, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Doctor Doomsday (notify | contribs).
- Speedy delete Deliberate re-upload of the image using the exact same filename. The same reasons that resulted in the deletion here are still valid — it runs counter to Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/copyright#Images which cannot be "fair use" and the underlying principle of not using material that can replace the original source. As per the cite guide, the image was created for and used as part of card set. J Greb (talk) 22:36, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Celticfan383 (notify | contribs).
- Reason 1: image can be replaced by a user made scheme; fails WP:NFCC policy #1. Reason 2: unclear image, does not significantly contribute to the readers' understanding of the topic of the article; fails WP:NFCC policy #8. Ilse@ 00:15, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
- It can hardly be accurately remade by a user so I think it should not be deleted. --Avala (talk) 16:07, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
- They've changed the stage as well. This stage is incorrect, and I think should be deleted. - Sims2aholic8 11:22, 26 March 2008
