The result of the discussion was: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons. Please nominate it for deletion there if you still feel it should be deleted. AnomieBOT⚡ 22:55, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Obsolete, the file has been replaced by a better version. Abel (talk) 04:24, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: not deleted - I have moved the image out of the infobox down to the section that discusses the drawing. It seems more than reasonable to have a sample of the artwork that is discussed in the article. What is not reasonable, as Damiens.rf correctly points out, is to simply use the drawing in place of a photo of the guy. --B (talk) 13:47, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Replaceable non-free drawing. Damiens.rf 11:12, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:00, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Disputed semi-speedy. I'm sure the hearing was important, but what these two men happened to look like at the time is not. This image is adding nothing to the article and, in any case, lacks solid sourcing/author information. J Milburn (talk) 12:14, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: deleted as the uploader has been blocked and the sourcing is dubious. The source claimed is a 1965 book (not public domain). --B (talk) 13:52, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not currently used, appears to have been uploaded for POV-pushing related to alleged Jewish involvement in the death of the Romanovs. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:07, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]