< July 5	July 7 >

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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons. Please nominate it for deletion there if you still feel it should be deleted. AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:14, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Obsolete Kbrawley (talk) 21:31, 6 July 2018 (UTC) Delete. Replaced by File:ICONICS updated logo and tagline.png[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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons. Please nominate it for deletion there if you still feel it should be deleted. AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:05, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A more accurate file now exists at Linacre_College_crest.svg JPBarrass (talk) 06:41, 6 July 2018 (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 on 2018 July 14. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:38, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:SmarTone logo.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

FFD referral because this is claimed as own work, but clearly sourced to archive sale literature. A clarification is needed as to the uploaders connection or ability to claim self work on this. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:22, 6 July 2018 (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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Image attributed to "Original Image Colorforms Corporation © 1968" - Toy designs are copyrightable, so I am not seeing why these can be under a self- license. Photo of 3D art (by a third party) at minimum. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:23, 6 July 2018 (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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Product advertising or promotional printed material, I fail to see how this can be self. At best not-renewed but more information as to source and uploaders connection would be desirable. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:25, 6 July 2018 (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 on 2018 July 14. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:39, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:ToglManRacer.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

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: Relicense as non-free. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:39, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Product logo, A clarification as to why this can be uploaded as self, and the uploaders connection to the logo, would be desirable. To me this logo is above TOO. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:29, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relicense to non-free logo and add a fair use. Salavat (talk) 11:34, 7 July 2018 (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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Refferal, as the prominent image of the photo, is packaging artowrk by a third-party. A clarifcation as to why this can be uplopaded under a self-license would be appreciated, as well as what the uploaders connection to the subject of the photo is. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:30, 6 July 2018 (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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Refferal, as there seems to have been a previous proposed deletion, based on doubts about this being own work. I am more than willing to assume good-faith, but a clarification would be desirable. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:48, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - originally claimed as own work. The PROD was removed as well as the claim of own work. Now it it has no source and the image is widely distributed across the web. The claimed free license is not verifiable without a proper source. -- Whpq (talk) 10:59, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not only was there a previous proposed deletion, the logs suggest an image with this name has been deleted as a copyvio twice now ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:41, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was same image (not just same name) and was cited to a google-images URL. DMacks (talk) 00:56, 9 July 2018 (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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This was uploaded under a self license, and I am willing to assume good faith. However I am bringing it to FFD, because the small resolution and gradient filter effect left, make me wonder if this is an image that's been previously published on a different site. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:56, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 11:35, 7 July 2018 (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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Referral as the prominent subject is a product design, My view is that there isn't enough originality in the design shown, but would like a second opinion on this. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:06, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned poor quality file with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 11:36, 7 July 2018 (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 on 2018 July 14. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:42, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:La Sierra High School (sign).jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused, appears to be a professional image, missing EXIF (dubious self-work claim) FASTILY 22:23, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 11:36, 7 July 2018 (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: keep. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:43, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused, unclear encyclopedic use FASTILY 22:24, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (or send to commons) along with File:Clippedwav.gif. As this image states, these two images are a pair that illustrate the concept of Clipping (audio). Although these images are not in use in that article, I don't see another comparable set for an arbitrary (real) signal vs a simple waveform. DMacks (talk) 04:20, 7 July 2018 (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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused, low-res, unlikely to be useful on Commons FASTILY 22:24, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 11:37, 7 July 2018 (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: keep. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:43, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused, low-res, unlikely to be useful on Commons FASTILY 22:25, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 11:37, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep (send to commons?). Mediocre-quality image of a specifically identified building at University of Bern for which I don't see any better images. DMacks (talk) 13:50, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep not good, but in scope. —innotata 17:00, 12 July 2018 (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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused, low-res, poorly-backlit, unlikely to be useful on Commons FASTILY 22:25, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 11:38, 7 July 2018 (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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused, low-res, possible copyvio (black border suggests it may be a screenshot/scan) FASTILY 22:26, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 11:38, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader specifically says took with own camera (that's unusually correctly worded if it were to be taken from someone else or a copy from another source). It's a reasonable picture of Congregation Shearith Israel, but delete as redundant because File:Congregation Shearith Israel 001.JPG is better-quality from same era and perspective. DMacks (talk) 13:58, 7 July 2018 (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: no consensus. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:44, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused, low-res, blurry, no encyclopedic use FASTILY 22:26, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 11:38, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (send to commons). Image of a building in Thodannur that could be used to illustrate residential/building style. Not great quality but I don't see any better on commons. DMacks (talk) 14:10, 7 July 2018 (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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused, low-res, unclear encyclopedic use FASTILY 22:28, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 11:38, 7 July 2018 (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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused, low-res, no obvious encyclopedic use, redundant to File:Bxsciholocaust.JPG. FASTILY 22:29, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly in scope of Bronx High School of Science where this specific library and collection is mentioned and we have no higher-res. Commons has File:Bxsciholocaust.JPG, but I have no idea whether png is preferable to jpg for a photograph. If so, send this commons; if not, delete this solely because it is redundant. DMacks (talk) 04:15, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, I've modified the nom to reflect that. -FASTILY 05:35, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, redundant to JPG file. Salavat (talk) 11:39, 7 July 2018 (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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Needs a statement that the photo was taken while the photographer was working for a US federal agency when it was taken for us to assume it is public domain. —innotata 22:31, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 11:39, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The topic is Wildlife crossing and the image is good quality and clearly illustrates it, but delete per nom. I can't find that the photographer (who is generally mentioned as being affiliated with Western Transportation Institute), was actually under contract with EPA for this photo. DMacks (talk) 14:16, 7 July 2018 (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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused, possible professional image (missing EXIF), dubious self-work claim. There also might be an issue with the artwork in the background - there is no FOP for 2D works in India (assuming that's where this was taken). FASTILY 22:32, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 11:40, 7 July 2018 (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 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:09, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

appears to be a scanned image of some sort, dubious self-work claim FASTILY 22:33, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 11:40, 7 July 2018 (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: no consensus. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:46, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused, low-res, dubious encyclopedic use FASTILY 22:33, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 11:40, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (send to commons?). The only other image we have (even on commons) of University of Richmond School of Law is a quite different representation of that subject. DMacks (talk) 14:25, 7 July 2018 (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: no consensus. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:46, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused low-res, dubious encyclopedic value FASTILY 22:34, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 11:40, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (send to commons). Resonably different and nice-looking alt to File:Stuarts Draft High School (renovated).jpg. The 2000s were apparently when Stuarts Draft High School was renovated, so maybe this image is even pre-renovation, or else a different face? Note different location of flagpole and bush, and building panel design. DMacks (talk) 14:35, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:SchuminWeb would likely know, shame he burned out or was driven out. DMacks (talk) 14:37, 7 July 2018 (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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Superseded by File:COAL BARGE ON THE MONONGAHELA RIVER MOVES PAST A UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION COKE PLANT AT CLAIRTON... - NARA - 557216.jpg (superior quality, format) Magog the Ogre (t • c) 23:41, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, redundant to JPG file. Salavat (talk) 11:41, 7 July 2018 (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.

July 6

File:ICONICS Logo.jpg

File:Blaze1.jpg

File:Outerspacemen.jpg

File:JohnnySevenCatalog.jpg

File:ToglManRacer.jpg

File:MoonMcDare.jpg

File:Anubha Sourya.jpg

File:NITJ Admin Block.jpg

File:Nokia 6610i Grey.JPG

File:La Sierra High School (sign).jpg

File:LukeFitzgerald.jpg

File:Volcano San Salvador 1963.jpg

File:St Toms.jpeg

File:Shearith Israel NYC.jpg

File:Lancisco wilson full grave marker 1.jpg

File:Bxsciholocaust.png

File:Interactive Highway wiki image.jpg

File:IndianBishops.jpg

File:Tillie and Reagan.jpg

File:Coal barge Clairton PA NARA 1973.gif