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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:54, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:666 DLX.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Temp144 (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 00:35, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:54, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bt2 666.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Temp144 (notify | contribs).

• according to the article's image caption this is a "Mock Cover By Fan". Adds nothing to reader's understanding, is not adequately sourced. Fails NFCC#8 and part of NFCC#10 Peripitus (Talk) 00:37, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:54, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:69 love songs booklet cover.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Pele Merengue (notify | contribs).

• front cover of a booklet in an article about an album. Not discussed or even mentioned in the article. Has a rationale that is (the incorrect in this case) boilerplate for an album cover. Fails WP: NFCC#8, and WP:NFCC#10 Peripitus (Talk) 00:39, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:54, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:4Ever Blue - Japanese cover.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Funk Junkie (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences ( slightly different poses ) can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 00:44, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:54, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:LK 5 DVD Edit.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by GreekStar12 (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences (is a cropped, rotated section ) can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 00:45, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:54, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Modern Talking us cov.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Bolafik (notify | contribs).

• non-free image that adds nothing of any significance to reader's understanding - fails WP:NFCC#8 Peripitus (Talk) 00:48, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. --MW talk contribs 22:27, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:54, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wordlesblyssealt.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Blackmagictea (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences ( background changed) can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 00:49, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:54, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:War is the answer special edition.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Apks94 (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences ( main image kept - background changed) can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 00:50, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:54, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Iron Maiden Can I Play With Madness shaped picture disc.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by EHonkoop (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences ( it's a cutout section with a black background) can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 00:56, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:54, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Christmas Kenny (Alternate).jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by CycloneGU (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 00:58, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:54, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Christmas Greetings.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by CycloneGU (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 01:03, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:54, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bowierebel.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Oslono (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences ( cropped, changed to b+w, text changed) can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 01:06, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:54, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Recently2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Dream out loud (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences (figures moved around ) can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 01:08, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:54, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tomorrow.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Kingfish (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences ( colourised and text added at the top) can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 01:09, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:54, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:KerberUnplugged.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Ostalocutanje (notify | contribs).

• non-free image that does not add significant understanding for reader's (fails WP:NFCC#8) If a reader visualising this is important it can be described in text as it is simply the band's logo with some minor other elements (fails WP:NFCC#1) Peripitus (Talk) 01:14, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:04, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Shirley Bassey Love Songs.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Nyctc7 (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 01:20, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have no objection to the file being deleted.--Nyctc7 (talk) 15:40, 3 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:AllHopeIsGone 2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by CrowzRSA (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences ( colour ) can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 01:21, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess Deletebecause I, the up-loader, agree that it is very similar to the other one in the article. CrowzRSA ^{19:23, 10 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Green Day - americanidiotcd2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by StuckWithMeFan113 (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences ( child is lower, red and black swapped) can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 01:30, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Other than the fact that the image shares the same colors, and shows an outline of three people, but they are not quiet variations of the same cover. CrowzRSA ^{03:06, 2 January 2010 (UTC)}[reply]

That is true. The differences, though, are small enough that text can suffice and not leave the reader lacking significant information. - Peripitus (Talk) 03:32, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:John Farnham Greatest Hits.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Sean 917 (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 01:38, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Apagorevmeno Summer Tour.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by GreekStar12 (notify | contribs).

• Promo poster for a tour that is not the primary subject of the article. Used simply to decorate the section where the tour is released. Does not meet WP:NFCC#8 Peripitus (Talk) 01:40, 2 January 2010 (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.

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. The only comment opposing deletion did not refute the concerns raised here. Angus McLellan (Talk) 01:05, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Apagorevmeno+cover.jpeg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Egtheod (notify | contribs).

• non-free image that could be replaced with text like "on the alternative cover the image is cropped tighter and she is looking over her right shoulder". Could be replaced with text alone (fails WP:NFCC#1) and does not significantly add to reader's understanding (fails WP:NFCC#8) Peripitus (Talk) 02:04, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - I'm not entirely sure this image should be deleted. Sure it is from the same photoshoot, but it is a completely different picture and represents a different edition of the album. With the argument/logic given here to delete the album cover, you could say the same for any alternative album cover on wikipeida. For example on The Fame Monster you could say "On the alternative cover the artist appears in a brunette wig with one eye bleeding". Where does the line get drawn? I can see alternative album covers that use the same photo but with different wording/cropping/colors being deleted, but this image is technically a different image. I am leaning toward Keep on this one.... Greekboy (talk) 05:11, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, fails WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8 as outlined by Peripitus. Stifle (talk) 09:27, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The rough consensus formed through past alternative cover discussions was that covers which differed only through minor alteration to things such as text and color were too similar to offer any valuable addition to the article. With this alternative cover, it is a completely different image, albeit from the same photoshoot. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 19:59, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Which adds what of significance to reader's understanding ? What does is add (of significance) that is not covered by text similar to what I have proposed ? - Peripitus (Talk) 22:36, 9 January 2010 (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.

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 G7 by Athaenara (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:00, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Missmayialbumcover.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Krazycev13 (notify | contribs).

• inside cover art, not the primary image for the subject. Fails WP:NFCC#8, is largely replaceable with text as it is similar to the existing one, and the rationale is poor Peripitus (Talk) 02:06, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Author Delete I already came up with a description. I will G8 this. --ҚЯĀŽΨÇÉV13 21:35, 6 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:New York Contemporary 5 Vol 2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by DISEman (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 02:07, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I agree that this falls short of WP:NFCC#3a, being very similar to File:New York Contemporary 5 Vol 1.jpg which is used in the same article. Jafeluv (talk) 10:40, 6 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Colbiecaillat-breakthroughdeluxe.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Kevin87 (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 02:10, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:BrotherOST.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Dan8700 (notify | contribs).

• album cover used simply to illustrate a section mentioning the soundtrack in the article. Does not significantly add to reader's understanding (fails WP:NFCC#8 ) and the rationale is boilerplate that is clearly incorrect for this image (fails WP:NFCC#10). Peripitus (Talk) 02:12, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Brother OST2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Dan8700 (notify | contribs).

• album cover used simply to illustrate a section mentioning the soundtrack in the article. Does not significantly add to reader's understanding (fails WP:NFCC#8 ) and the rationale is boilerplate that is clearly incorrect for this image (fails WP:NFCC#10). Peripitus (Talk) 02:13, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Burn Burn alternate cover.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by The Hyphen (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences (scaled with a black border) can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 02:14, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:CatharsisLimited.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Zombie433 (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences ("camera" angle changed a bit ) can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 02:17, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Caveep2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Xtrememachineuk (notify | contribs).

• we have this image .... why ? Adds nothing of significance to reader's understanding and fails WP:NFCC#8. Probably has enough copyrighted material to be a derivative work so it needs to meet the NFCC criteria. Peripitus (Talk) 02:18, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I don't understand why we have images of promotional CDs on the page of every Muse single. Perhaps one on each album article to illustrate the unique promotional packaging the band used for each album's singles, for example the clear gatefolds from Showbiz or the Anti-Static bags used on singles from Absolution. Keytar Shredder (talk) 10:52, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cave 2.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Keytar Shredder (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences ( colours) can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 02:18, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Alternative cover art with several dfferences. There is no need to create an artwork section in the article to describe something which can be shown with an image. Keytar Shredder (talk) 10:48, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Yes, there is some differences, but how is this important. There is no critical commentary on the alternate cover and it is certainly not needed for identification. Rettetast (talk) 11:04, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, standard WP:NFCC#3a violation. No critical commentary, no addition to readers' understanding beyond that provided by the first image (which is not much anyhow). Stifle (talk) 09:30, 8 January 2010 (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.

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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:04, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:German Empire, Wilhelminian.PNG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Smith2006 (notify | contribs).

• OR, LQ, OB, use not stated. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 03:11, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:04, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:German empire 1871 english.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Auntieruth55 (notify | contribs).

• OR, LQ, OB, use not stated. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 03:11, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 G7 by Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 08:03, 2 January 2010 (UTC) Its an image of myself, which i uploaded myself, but no longer wish to be on wikipediaД narchistPig (talk) 04:30, 2 January 2010 (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.

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:  Relisted at today's FfD page. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:58, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:UlloJohnGottaNewMotor PictureDisc.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by DaveG12345 (notify | contribs).

• Rationale claims it is a cover but it is a picture disc. No discussed in the article and is not the primary image for the subject. Does not significantly add to reader's understanding and so fails to meet WP:NFCC#8 Peripitus (Talk) 06:38, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep (as uploader) - to address the specific points raised:

1. I think only the (non-editable) parts of the Templates themselves "claim it is a cover" - the contents of the templates that I am able to edit make clear it is a picture disc. AFAIK, there are no equivalent templates relating specifically to picture discs (let me know if such things exist), and Templates "must" be used for image rationales etc. these days, otherwise bots blindly nominate everything for deletion! :-(
2. It is not the primary image for the subject (my Rationale was wrong there), but the picture disc is certainly discussed in the article, in very specific terms of the marketing of the single in question - which is the only reason I uploaded the image in the first place! So I feel that part of the nom's objection ("No discussed in the article") is mistaken.
3. Obviously, I feel the image significantly adds to the reader's understanding, which again is why I uploaded it. In fact, I originally intended uploading the single's rear sleeve image instead (which is also specifically discussed in the article), but I felt that would have been more problematic from a fair-use POV, since the rear cover directly reproduces material that is itself copyrighted by the Ford Motor Company. Hence, I decided the picture disc was a better choice to give the reader the requisite information in the least problematic way.
4. Reviewing the Fair-Use Template as I had it originally, I think I had filled it in incorrectly (I had Use = Infobox and had not specified an alternate Purpose) - I have fixed that now (I think!). Please let me know here or at my Talkpage if there is still a problem relating to this.
5. BTW: the nom doesn't specify, but if the problem is with the image's physical location in the Infobox (rather than elsewhere in the article), then please feel free to move it (or let me know on my Talkpage, and I will move it). Before I placed the image in the Infobox, I had noted that alternate cover art is commonly appended to album/single article Infoboxes without any controversy, simply for the sake of neatness, provided the image's inclusion in the article also otherwise complies with fair-use policy - which I feel this one does, which is why I included this image in this article's Infobox. Regards. --DaveG12345 (talk) 16:31, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• The question is - what significant understanding does it give the reader that is not covered by the existing text "the 1983 reissue included a picture disc format featuring Sayle reclining on the bonnet of a Cortina Mark III" ? For me the text covers this quite adequately. Peripitus (Talk) 20:41, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks, so the procedural stuff mentioned in the nom is now OK, and the nom boils down to whether or not the image in the article satisfies WP:NFCC#8. I feel it does. In particular, I feel it meets current consensus of NFCC#8 interpretation as being clarified right now in this Talk Page discussion. FWIW, I found that (e.g.) Jheald's interpretation of this policy seemed to basically match mine, the comments in this diff[1] (and related discussion) being particularly relevant here. I feel this obviously isn't a case of "alternate cover art" being a simple change of lettering or font on otherwise identical "alternate" covers - those should certainly be deleted from WP (and this IFD is rightly full of them). The case here is totally different - the picture disc is illustrative of a completely different marketing approach for the 1983 single reissue, with completely different artwork to the original sleeve, all of which the article clearly discusses in compliance with NFCC#8 (and the article could be expanded in future here, of course). --DaveG12345 (talk) 07:06, 8 January 2010 (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.

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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:04, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cindyandthetvshow.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by CJ1045 (notify | contribs).

• Orphan. The only article to have used this image has been deleted (Cindy And The TV Show). Sarilox (talk) 06:54, 2 January 2010 (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.

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: Erroneous Nomination. When following the listing instructions (step 2), you need to replace "File_name.ext" with the actual name of the file. You'll also want to put the name of the uploader just after "Uploader=", and your reason for deletion just after "Reason=". Feel free to just replace this entire section with the corrected template. If you are still having trouble, ask for help at WT:FFD or at my talk page. AnomieBOT⚡ 09:04, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:File name.ext (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by [[User talk:#File:File name.ext listed for deletion|]] ([ notify] | contribs).

• Mcgrath50 (talk) 08:21, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 G7 by Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:07, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mcgrath50.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by [[User talk:#File:Mcgrath50.jpg listed for deletion|]] ([ notify] | contribs).

• Obsolete - Personal photo for user page, needs to go! Mcgrath50 (talk) 08:21, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bieberonetimedance.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Candyo32 (notify | contribs).

• This image fails the non free content criteria. It doesn't enhance readers' understanding of the article. Theleftorium 17:12, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 13:09, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Signing of the Treaty of Lisbon.ogg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Ssolbergj (notify | contribs).

• WP:NFCC#8. How is a 6 minute video important for the understanding of the article. Most readers don't watch such videos anyway, but what are they really missing. Rettetast (talk) 17:37, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Well, it is undoubtedly a unique, historic event. Wikipedia seems to allow for the use of fair-use (non-free) illustration of unique, historic events, if there isn't any free alternative available. As far as I know, there is no free video of this event available. I have written a rationale on why, in specific, an image would not be sufficient for the illustration on this event. You could read it. What matters is how encyclopedic it is, not how often people think it will be watched. Personal opinions on what's "boring" aren't relevant either. I do agree that 5 minutes and 54 seconds means this video is fairly lengthy, but in the rationale I have underlined that the source material is 55 minutes and 22 seconds long, and that this version is edited down to what's absolutely vital its purpose of illustrating the event. I can however try to shorten the video even more, if people consider a specific part of the video to be too long or not fair-use. - SSJ ☎ 18:32, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, serious NFCC#8 fail. Readers do not need to see this video to understand our article. Even if it did pass NFCC#8, we would still have to consider #3 (although tangentially). Stifle (talk) 09:36, 8 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Head angle rake and trail.svg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Xyzzy n (notify | contribs).

• Unclear image, not used on any article page. Replaced by the clearer image File:Bicycle dimensions.svg. Mononomic (talk) 18:34, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Reasons are clear.

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.

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 G7 by Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 13:07, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:2007 rainbow.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Simply south (notify | contribs).

• Very LQ, OR (only used on uploader's gallery of images), UE. Mononomic (talk) 20:32, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I do not see what the problem of having a colourful 2007 image is. Its within my userpage and has been used in the past to brighten up a dull area. Simply south (talk) 20:47, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • The problem is not with the colorful 2007. It's with the fact that this image has no forseeable use anywhere else on Wikipedia. "Please upload only files that are used (or will be used) in encyclopedia articles or project pages; anything else will be deleted. If you have extra relevant images, consider uploading them to the Wikimedia Commons, where they can be linked from Wikipedia." (from WP:NOTWEBHOST) Mononomic (talk) 05:46, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Ok. Delete it. Simply south (talk) 13:30, 3 January 2010 (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.

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: Deleted, too low quality to fulfill any useful encyclopedic purpose. --Sherool (talk) 19:46, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jarnailandfamily.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Mc nappyboy (notify | contribs).

• Very low quality, impossible to actually identify the supposed subject. Perspeculum (talk) 21:21, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's a fair picture of Jarnail Singh, it's obviously him... And mate the other picture that was used for Jarnail was even more blurred... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mc nappyboy (talk • contribs) 21:31, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have uploaded a new image http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jarnail-Singh.jpg, but before using it on the article, I want to wait to see if anyone objects to it's use, as it claims a fair-use rationale - then we should have a replacement. But this image is far too blurry, and if you showed that picture to someone they would never be able to identify the subject. Perspeculum (talk) 21:42, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok but the last picture used was even more blurred: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jarnail_Singh.jpg - that's why I thought it should have been changed. And when you click on my picture, he might look far away and slightly blurred, but you can still tell it's him... but sorry if it isn't a good picture, it's just that I saw him before the Coventry game, and took a picture, and I just wanted to contribute - but sorry if it's accidental vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mc nappyboy (talk • contribs) 12:28, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not claiming it's vandalism, only I and it appears at least one other editor say we can't tell it's him! There's also the issue that the photo was taken without his knowledge, so there may be a legal issue there. Besides, looking at the first photo, at least that one is in context, you can tell he is a referee! Perspeculum (talk) 00:17, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - much as it pains me to say that we should delete a free image that is used in an article. There is absolutely no way of telling if the subject is as stated and the quality is so poor as to render the image useless - Peripitus (Talk) 11:21, 20 January 2010 (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.

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 Rettetast (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:00, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Entranceto55CollinsStreet.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Dingoman1 (notify | contribs).

• suspected copyvio, see here; this user also uploaded a watermarked image, I suspect this uploader does not fully understand the rules of copyright. An alternative is that this user is an employee at Collins Place given its involvement with that article. Simeon87 (talk) 22:09, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Rettetast (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:00, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:35CollinsStreetEntrance.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Dingoman1 (notify | contribs).

• suspected copyvio, see here; also see previous nomination Simeon87 (talk) 22:13, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 13:07, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:101Collins22.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Dingoman1 (notify | contribs).

• suspected copyvio, image found here Simeon87 (talk) 22:16, 2 January 2010 (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.

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: Some Deleted - about 1/2 deleted. Ones left are all of the same place and taken with the same point-and-shoot camera. - Peripitus (Talk) 11:15, 20 January 2010 (UTC) Sorry, couldn't figure out how to do this properly; this user has recently uploaded various images and I suspect they're all taken from the internet. Also see the nominations above; without further details, I think it's better to delete them. An alternative is that this user is an employee at Collins Place given its involvement with that article. - Simeon87 (talk) 22:21, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please also check this talk page comment. - Simeon87 (talk) 23:40, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kikujiro OST.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Dan8700 (notify | contribs).

• album cover in a movie article. Decorative use only. Not discussed and the rationale is clearly incorrect. Fails WP:NFCC#8 and WP:NFCC#10 Peripitus (Talk) 22:46, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:King of Kings Live (DVD cover).jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Siquisloco (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 22:48, 2 January 2010 (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.

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. Differences can be described in text. Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:43, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kool Moe Dee album original.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by MuzikJunky (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 22:49, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don’t delete because its useful information for record collectors, and it’s the rarer original cover! Peace. —MuzikJunky (talk) 07:12, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yet is is basically a duplicate and I can find no reliable commentary anywhere on the differences between the covers. - Peripitus (Talk) 23:53, 15 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fear Factory - Obsolete.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Jknobull (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences ( vignetted part of the other cover with different text ) can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 22:50, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:1234LIVE.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Kriskodai (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences (lightened and text added at the bottom ) can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 22:51, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:INCONCERT.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Kriskodai (notify | contribs).

• additional non-free image that is used simply to show the cover of a release. No commentary on the image and does not significantly add to reader's understanding. Fails WP:NFCC#8 Peripitus (Talk) 22:52, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:OutThereAAO.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by FotoPhest (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences (colour ) can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 22:52, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 both Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:The-Police Outlandos-d'Amour-yellow.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Fp cassini (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 22:53, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note that this also applies to File:The Police Outlandos d'Amour original front cvr.jpg in the same article - Peripitus (Talk) 22:54, 2 January 2010 (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.

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. Differences clearly can be described in article text, if that's important enough to include in the article. Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:41, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Outta+Here+UK+album+cover.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by S2daam (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences (her position in the image moved + some text changes ) can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 22:55, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The covers also has a different background along with the "small" differences. MatthewWaller (talk) 16:31, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. If important the differences can be described with words. Rettetast (talk) 16:56, 11 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Quickspace (US).jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Corn-hole (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences ( dot size and colour changed ) can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 22:57, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:04, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tisvildeleje2008-24aug.gif (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by 11thearlofmar (notify | contribs).

• Orphan that seems to be a smaller portion of File:Tisvildeleje2004.jpg. — Bility (talk) 22:57, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:04, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tie rod truss.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Billbeee (notify | contribs).

• Orphan, use not stated. If it's for Truss, that page has plenty of images already. — Bility (talk) 22:57, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rareform.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by KiNNsTeR (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences ( changed to an edge only, single colour image) can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 22:58, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 G7 by Athaenara (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:00, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ready for the Victory Special Russian Version.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by MisterWiki (notify | contribs).

• Image is so similar to the existing one in the article it can be replaced with text that describes the small differences - fails WP:NFCC#1 Peripitus (Talk) 22:58, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. --MW talk contribs 23:04, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Elbow red single alt.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Biocollector (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 22:59, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I shall remove it since it can be explained in words. Thank you for letting me know. Biocollector (talk) 02:26, 3 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Refilltracklist.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Minnuthepyro (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image that is very similar to another one in the same article. The small differences can easily be described with text alone, without significantly impairing reader's understanding. As replaceable with a free alternative this image fails WP:NFCC#1 and is excessive us of non-free content (fails WP:NFCC#3a) Peripitus (Talk) 23:00, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Zuspaet.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Anrod (notify | contribs).

• non-free image that is so similar to an existing one in the article that text alone can adequately describe the differences without significantly impairing reader's understanding. Fails WP:NFCC#1 as replaceable with a free alternative (text) and NFCC#3a as excessive use of non-free content. Peripitus (Talk) 23:18, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 the other file Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:10XroniaMazi.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Planecrazy22 (notify | contribs).

• non-free image that is so similar to an existing one in the article that text alone can adequately describe the differences without significantly impairing reader's understanding. Fails WP:NFCC#1 as replaceable with a free alternative (text) and NFCC#3a as excessive use of non-free content. Peripitus (Talk) 23:18, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - This is the original album cover for the album. Perhaps you meant to nominate the re-release cover instead which is just cropped with extra wording? Greekboy (talk) 05:02, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep but delete File:10HroniaMaziIt'sDestiny.jpg instead. Stifle (talk) 09:46, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Either going is good. Images are just too similar - Peripitus (Talk) 11:07, 8 January 2010 (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.

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 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:U2vid zootv.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Typhoon (notify | contribs).

• non-free image that is so similar to an existing one in the article that text alone can adequately describe the differences without significantly impairing reader's understanding. Fails WP:NFCC#1 as replaceable with a free alternative (text) and NFCC#3a as excessive use of non-free content. Peripitus (Talk) 23:19, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 G7 by Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:SMILE.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Fiquem (notify | contribs).

• It's not being used, and probably never will. Fiquem (talk) 23:51, 2 January 2010 (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.

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 G7 by Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fiquem.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Fiquem (notify | contribs).

• It's not being used, and probably never will. Fiquem (talk) 23:51, 2 January 2010 (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.