< January 16 | January 18 > |
---|
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned low resolution file. Superseded by PNG and SVG files in Commons. Sreejith K (talk) 05:54, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: deleted without prejudice to future recreation or undeletion if contested. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:32, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This frankly just has an egregious spelling error and it's never been bothered to be fixed for a year now. —Ryulong (竜龙) 11:31, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Non-free photograph of a sports team celebrating after an important win. FUR claims the event was of historic significance, which may be true but is irrelevant. As so often, the question is not how important the event was, but how important the image is to help us understand the event. As so often, it isn't. The visual details of how these men are laughing and holding their champagne bottles provides no significant information helping us understand the nature of the event at all. Fails NFCC#8. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:09, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Another non-free photograph of a sports team celebrating. Same argument applies as in the case above. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:11, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Another non-free photograph of a sports team celebrating. Same argument applies as with the cases above. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:13, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Another non-free photograph of an athlete celebrating. Same arguments apply as for the cases above. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:26, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This image was used to illustrate an article which was deleted as non-notable. It's now not used and unlikely to be useful. (Also, bad name, uncertain copyright status) – Quadell (talk) 15:26, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WP:FFD: highly-compressed JPEG no longer in use in articles (was in Southern Illinois) and could easily be re-created as SVG later; also, determination of counties is not sourced Closeapple (talk) 15:42, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No evidence that the uploader is the author or has permission to grant license. Morbidthoughts (talk) 16:00, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Blurry, orphan, bad name, not useful – Quadell (talk) 16:02, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dark photo, orphan, not useful, bad name, no description – Quadell (talk) 16:06, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as G6 by John (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:01, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Orphan and corresponds to older version of awb. Better images are available. Magioladitis (talk) 16:39, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Unused. Impossible to tell if the person is notable or not. Uploader has uploaded a lot of images with strange licensing terms, so it is also possible that this image might have a wrong licence and that it might be unfree. Stefan2 (talk) 20:04, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This seems to be a picture of the uploader. It is unused and I suppose that the person isn't notable, so unlikely in scope on Commons. Stefan2 (talk) 20:31, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: delete. This image simply does not qualify as fair use, and will never qualify as fair use, per WP:NFG and WP:NFCC#1 (a stained glass window in the US from before 1978 is ((PD-US-no notice))). There is 1 keep !vote (from Amandajm) which seems to completely misunderstand Wikipedia's fair use policies (per Stefan2). The other keep !vote is based on a contingency that hasn't occurred, which the author himself admits is unlikely to occur. The balance of policy and opinions stated here clearly points toward deletion. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:31, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not really sure about this image. The file information page suggests that something is from 1986, but it looks much older. Saint-Denis is a very old church, so it is very possible that the copyright tag and the 1986 date are wrong and that the window in fact is in the public domain. If so, it can be moved to Commons and tagged with ((rotate|resetexif)) to get the orientation right. If unfree, it is probably replaceable by some other window, so it unlikely fits with the fair use criteria. If kept as fair use, it needs to be rotated using exiftool or a similar program to reset the EXIF orientation. Stefan2 (talk) 20:45, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Unused image should be deleted per discussion: Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 January 16 Entry: File:White Dragon of Mercia.png -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 21:03, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned image is so small and low quality that it is very difficult to understand the subject. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 22:10, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]