Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 February 29

< February 28	March 1 >

February 29

File:Hgnm2.JPG

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned File, Unknown Subject, no use to keep Ronhjones ^(Talk) 00:05, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Princess Pocahontas Pageant and Ball.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable. There's no reason the event organizers couldn't contribute a photo of this ongoing event. Kelly ^hi! 00:05, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Devil's Gate Dam.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Photo retouched by uploader, but original source not provided. Kelly ^hi! 00:07, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Hi, my name is adam.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned File, Unknown Subject, no use to keep Ronhjones ^(Talk) 00:21, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:High Ground.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned File, Unencyclopaedic, no use to keep Ronhjones ^(Talk) 01:00, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:HighDom.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned File, Unknown Subject, no use to keep Ronhjones ^(Talk) 01:13, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Listening to SBJ upon entry Mass Pike.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image was previously nominated for deletion here. Reasons given for deletion then were that it was unencyclopedic and low quality. Reasons against were that it illustrated the article. The discussion was closed without reference to any of the above, using the justifications that it was "used for a long time" and "free", neither of which are valid reasons. While I also enjoy the song which the article is about and agree that it is well-known, those are reasons that justify the article, not a poor quality image of people driving and looking at something mentioned in the song. If that were the case, we could fill every song article on WP with pictures of girlfriends, cars, money... virtually anything, justifying it as "illustrating [a] strong association", which was the uploader's rationale. It really doesn't even do that well, as it is a poorly-composed shot of some blurry signs from inside a car. As it does not fall under image criteria, this one needs to go. Delete. 50.113.107.91 (talk) 03:46, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep. Most song articles lack illustrative images (typically just a sleeve cover, if anything). This song happens to have a strong geographical association to the Mass Pike and the two endpoints named in the lyric (go to a James Taylor concert anywhere in the Northeast U.S. and you'll see what I mean, the applause for the line always comes). And here is a photo that shows both endpoints as well as a James Taylor cassette cover that contains the song. This will convey to the reader the geographical association more strongly than any text by itself can. There are only a few other articles that do this – Penny Lane is an example – so this is hardly the slippery slope to pictures of girlfriends illustrating every song. As for the image quality, the "Stockbridge" and "Boston" are both clear, and that's what counts. Wasted Time R (talk) 04:07, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can't say I agree with your reasoning. Many, many songs have geographical associations -- as long as we're on James Brown, he sings plenty himself. But that doesn't mean we'd put a picture from North Carolina up on Carolina in my Mind, Los Angeles on Honey Don't Leave L.A., Mexico on Mexico... you get my point. So standing by itself, that's a tenuous argument.

That also doesn't address the poor quality issue. It looks like something you might see in a friend's photo album from a road trip, which is all well and good, but it's not encyclopedic. I don't even agree that the roadsigns are clear. They're blurry. Throwing in a cassette is irrelevant. It's not even noticeable unless you're looking for it; I didn't realize it was there until you mentioned it (and I zoomed in), and it's completely illegible. If it was a better composed shot of just the intersection and signs (something like File:A20 Ouest km143.jpg, for example), well, maybe there'd be something to consider. But as it is, it's sideways, it's blurry, it's cluttered, and the subject only makes up maybe 10% of the entire image. It couldn't even be cropped into usability. I'm sure it was a memorable moment for you, but it's not an image appropriate for an article. Nothing personal. 50.113.107.91 (talk) 05:39, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is the home of many less-than-ideal quality photographs. That comes with the territory due to its very restrictive image use rights. Take a look at the Jackson Browne article, for example. The images are all grainy, soft focus, or uncharacteristic of the subject. For a long time the top photo on the James Taylor article was this one, which has a mysterious hand in it. That one is still in the article, just later on. Look at the images in the Carole King article – none of these are pro quality either. The only photo of Roy Bittan has a flash reflection and a totally distracting background in it. And on and on. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:49, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Just looking at the image, it does not look encyclopedic to me. But the fact that it is in use at Sweet Baby James (song) clearly means it is encyclopedic for the editors there. Since the image is free it is not up to FFD to disturb that. If anyone thinks that the image is a detriment to the article, the right approach is to go to Talk:Sweet Baby James (song) and get consensus for removing the image from the article (or be bold, remove it and wait for while to see if anyone objects). Once orphaned, there is a stronger case for deletion although not one I would personally agree with. There is no requirement to delete free images of marginal utility and no policy that such images "need to go". Thincat (talk) 09:22, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as used. Bulwersator (talk) 21:58, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Attributesmusicsm.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Smaller version of image already on commons, see http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Attributes_of_Music.jpg Lithoderm 04:54, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Lobstersm2.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Smaller copy of image already on commons, see http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Still_Life_with_Lobster.jpg Lithoderm 04:56, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Jordan in Jubilee.gif

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Invalid FUR —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:17, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Monday Night Wars Ratings.JPG

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image that should be text that's been replaced with text. Beao 13:17, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:CfMC logo.png

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned logo for an organization that fails the notability guidelines. The article, CfMC, was deleted. Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 15:33, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Potter6-Czech.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seemingly randomly chosen image without critical discussion (WP:NFCC#8). There is already a different cover illustration further up in the article. Stefan2 (talk) 16:06, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:CBCMap.png

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned user image. Kelly ^hi! 16:31, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:RMS Cedric.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

without date, tagged as "This image is in the public domain in the United States because it was first published outside the United States prior to January 1, 1923" + "Non-free media information and use rationale for RMS Cedric" without information whatever it is replaceable. Bulwersator (talk) 17:18, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:HillCountryRun 2005-145-small.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned File. Almost identical (and better) version on commons - commons:File:2005_K1200S_wridr-001.jpg Ronhjones ^(Talk) 20:22, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Hillltopmossad2.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned File, Unknown Subject, no use to keep Ronhjones ^(Talk) 21:16, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Hilohilson.JPG

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned File, Unknown Subject, no use to keep Ronhjones ^(Talk) 21:28, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Hiltown3d!2.JPG

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned File, Unencyclopaedic, no use to keep Ronhjones ^(Talk) 21:30, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Hinton - rich.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned file, by a WP:SPA, WP:NOTHOST Ronhjones ^(Talk) 21:48, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:His name is Hydro.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned file, written like an advert Ronhjones ^(Talk) 22:25, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Malverncmn.jpg + 3 others

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 11:37, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned file. Tiny image of unknown subject - suspect in Malvern, not much use Ronhjones ^(Talk) 22:56, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Friends-cast.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F5 by Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:05, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is already a non free cast photo in use. We hope (talk) 23:23, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Friends-tv-show-05.jpg

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F5 by Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:05, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We already have a non free cast photo. We hope (talk) 23:27, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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