Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2006 October 12

< October 11	October 13 >

October 12

Image:0 025photoshop3.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Mreenibeen (notify | contribs). OR, UE Nv8200p talk 02:38, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Tony Pierce.JPG (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Shakey Bear (notify | contribs). OR, UE ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 02:58, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:My first day on the job and I already need a barber.JPG (talk | delete)

Uploaded by DRosenbach (notify | contribs). OR, UE ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 02:58, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

delete it...drosenbach

• Good one. Delete. Pavel Vozenilek 23:31, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Aaronkinney.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Kinneyboy90 (notify | contribs). OR, UE ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 02:58, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Go ahead and delete it, I don't need it anymore, it's no longer used in my userspace, which was what it was for prior to when I changed my userpage. Aaрон Кинни (t) 16:06, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Dodge Caliber 2.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by The Helper S (notify | contribs). OR, CV ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 02:58, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:010101.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by JuliaOelfke (notify | contribs). OR, UE Nv8200p talk 03:06, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Mondaynightraw.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by 3bulletproof16 (notify | contribs). OB- obsoleted by Image:RAW.jpg -- bulletproof ^3:16 04:35, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Mondaynightraw.JPG (talk | delete)

Uploaded by 3bulletproof16 (notify | contribs). OB- obsoleted by Image:RAW.jpg -- bulletproof ^3:16 04:44, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Zilog Z80.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Damicatz (notify | contribs). This copyrighted image with unclear sourcing is redundant to the five other free-use images at Zilog Z80 ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 04:49, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

• The others are not images of the original Zilog Z80, so how can it be redundant? --StuartBrady (Talk) 14:22, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

• A chip is a chip is a chip ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 19:37, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

• Huh? ... Anyway, I've emailed the photographer, Gennadiy Shvets, and he's replied to me, giving permission for this to be tagged as CC Attribution 2.5. (I suppose someone else should confirm this, so that we're all happy.) --StuartBrady (Talk) 23:54, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

• Great! Add {{cc-by-2.5}} to the description, include a copy of the e-mail permission, and this image might as well be delisted. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 01:16, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

• Okay, done. Thanks! --StuartBrady (Talk) 22:45, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Not deleted. howcheng {chat} 04:05, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Zhenghepainting.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Miborovsky (notify | contribs). no license- Shizhao 07:34, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

{{Non-free fair use in}} tag added. -- Миборовский 18:15, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Docevil flag.gif (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Rubber cat (notify | contribs). CV, LQ, OR, UE, Wikipedia is not Something Awful. This is not encyclopedic and does not add anything to any part of Wikipedia. I have removed it from girlfriend twice now because it is frankly an embarassment to have it there. The quality and the content are awful and it amounts to nothing more than an SA in-joke. violet/riga (t) 08:13, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

• Delete defenently a copyvio and scertainly not ensyclopedic by any stretch of the word. --Sherool (talk) 09:03, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Author has given explicit permission for its use. It illustrates both the concept at hand and the awkwardness many "nerds" find in having a girlfriend. Multiple "Star Trek" images are already on Wikipedia. It is not an "inside joke" as "Star Trek" is a highly popular science-fiction franchise. It falls under fair use as both satire and derivative content. I disagree with the assertion that "the quality and the content are awful." I find it no less "embarrassing" than the fact that there is an article about each and every Pokémon. Finally, the word "encyclopedic" is theoretically infinitely stretchable. --Rubber cat 21:12, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

• First of all the "author" can not claim ownership of content derived from a copyrighted TV show so his permission to use means nothing. Secondly asuming the image actualy made a "fair use as satire" claim rater than a fraudument GFDL licensed claim, that would only be valid (on Wikipedia) if it was used as satire on the copyrighted work (i.e. Star Trek) itself, wich it is clearly not when used in Girlfriend (wich incidentaly doesn't mention any of the conseps you say it ilustrates), so it would basicaly fail just about all of our fair use criteria. Besides the obvious copyright problems it's just not something that is suitable for a ensyclopedia article, on the consept of girlfriends or anyting else I can think of. --Sherool (talk) 21:42, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Clearly UE regardless of copyright status. YellowDot 00:19, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. It doesn't even make sense, and is also unencyclopedic. Francis Irving 10:09, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:-SDF--StoneR.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Zzchanli (notify | contribs). Orphanded, not ensyclopedic- Sherool (talk) 08:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:0,,1595354,00.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Geppapa (notify | contribs). Orphanded, possebly a copyvio- Sherool (talk) 08:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:000 0039.JPG (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Willm089 (notify | contribs). Orphanded, not ensyclopedic- Sherool (talk) 08:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:000 1760.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Hermaine (notify | contribs). Orphanded, most likely not ensyclopedic- Sherool (talk) 08:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:011010.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Jeax (notify | contribs). Orphanded, unensyclopedic, likely copyvio and depending on who "josh" is might also count as an attack image- Sherool (talk) 08:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:01med.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Medel777 (notify | contribs). Orphanded, not very ensyclopedic- Sherool (talk) 08:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:021105084625-1-.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Tekguru@charter.net (notify | contribs). Orphanded, not ensyclopedic- Sherool (talk) 08:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:0232.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Qwertying (notify | contribs). Orphanded, not ensyclopedic- Sherool (talk) 08:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:100 1940.JPG (talk | delete)

Uploaded by YoshiBob210 (notify | contribs). Orphanded, not ensyclopedic- Sherool (talk) 10:09, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:060622.png (talk | delete)

Uploaded by SuperBuuBuu (notify | contribs). Orphanded, copyvio, not ensyclopedic- Sherool (talk) 10:13, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Cookeville map chamber.png (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Nbmatt (notify | contribs). OR, "Provided by the Cookeville Chamber of Commerce", but tagged as PD-USGov. This is unlikely to be correct. BigDT 10:53, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:095136.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by LippyBrit (notify | contribs). Orphanded, not ensyclopedic- Sherool (talk) 13:08, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:100 2429.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Seattlemusic (notify | contribs). Orphanded, not ensyclopedic- Sherool (talk) 13:12, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:1004845um2.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Bennyandgongy (notify | contribs). Orphanded, not ensyclopedic- Sherool (talk) 13:12, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:NewYorkDollspm.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Pauliomcbride (notify | contribs). User Paul McBride looks awfully young to have taken this early 1970's publicity photo of the New York Dolls he so generously released into the public domain. —Chowbok 17:34, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

I deleted it, along with all the other images uploaded by this user, half of which were personal pictures, several other images copied from http://www.newtownards.com, etc. —Centrx→talk • 04:01, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Southeastern logo.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by [[User talk:#Image:Southeastern logo.jpg listed for deletion|]] ([ notify] | contribs). obselete, SLB19

Image:Bbc Circle.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Hospitalised (notify | contribs). A duplication in terms of content of Image:Bbc one 2006.jpg which had been uploaded previously.- Wikiwoohoo _talk 18:28, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Chaos emeralds2.jpeg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by A.M.962 (notify | contribs). uploaded by mistake- A.M.962 19:40, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Nothing.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Ashenai (notify | contribs). orphan Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 20:54, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy. IfD is overcrowded already. Pavel Vozenilek 23:34, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Lightmatter colosseum-70x52.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Ashenai (notify | contribs). orphan Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 20:56, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:TXMap-doton-Roma-70x52.png (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Ashenai (notify | contribs). orphan Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 20:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Siege Rhodes 2.1.png (talk | delete)

Uploaded by ACupOfCoffee (notify | contribs). orphan Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 21:00, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

I didn't originally upload it. I just edited it. — User:ACupOfCoffee@ 00:31, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Sampa-dia.png (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Neofpo (notify | contribs). orphan and extreamly large (15.7meg) Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 21:04, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Emory Quad Panorama.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Nrbelex (notify | contribs). orphan and extreamly large (14.6meg) Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 21:06, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Go ahead and kill it. I was expecting to put it in the Emory University article but it didn't really fit anywhere. Nrbelex ^(talk) 00:22, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Taobh Tuath beach.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Neil McDermott (notify | contribs). orphan Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 21:10, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:MontrealWindsorHotel.png (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Skeezix1000 (notify | contribs). orphan Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 21:17, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Building Pic.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by SCArtChic (notify | contribs). orphan Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 21:18, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:ASDA edinburgh store.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Wackymacs (notify | contribs). Fair use. A replacement would be easily created. No attempt made after two years. Mark83 21:20, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Presspicture.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Since1800 (notify | contribs). orphan Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 21:22, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:SriLanka Sigiriya gardens.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Shoka (notify | contribs). orphan Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 21:23, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

• Sigiriya has a whole gallery of pictures uploaded by Shoka. This picture (and the one bellow) may have be forgotten. Perhaps they could be moved into a gallery in Commons. Pavel Vozenilek 23:40, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:SriLanka Sigiriya gardens2.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Shoka (notify | contribs). orphan Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 21:24, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Barnstable national historic register.pdf (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Wjones59 (notify | contribs). orphan Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 21:27, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:IMG 1744-01.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Runner301 (notify | contribs). orphan Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 21:29, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Telluride Panorama annotated metric.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Debivort (notify | contribs). orphan Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 21:30, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Mandelbrot Deep Re-Twisted.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by David R. Ingham (notify | contribs). orphan Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 21:35, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Jaredsandler1.png (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Thesmythe (notify | contribs). orphan Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 21:36, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Apgar real estate score table 1.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Lbelledit@bellsouth.net (notify | contribs). orphan Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 21:38, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Apgar real estate score table 2.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Lbelledit@bellsouth.net (notify | contribs). orphan Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 21:38, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Spyniepalace.png (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Billreid (notify | contribs). orphan Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 21:40, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

This image has been tagged for deletion because it is stated as an orphan. Not true - it has been in the Spynie Palace article since 26 September 2006. The tag should be removed.--Billreid 07:37, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Siddiqui.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Siddiqui (notify | contribs). orphan Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 21:43, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:NORTHKOREANNN.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Dhwani1989 (notify | contribs). CV, isn't a valid fair use claim as it isn't used in an article related to the copyright owner and the article doesn't get much, if any, useful information from the picture.- Rory096 23:39, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, the copyright owner is the North Korean government (the immediate source, the New York Times or AP or whatever, did not create the image in any substantial way), but I'm not disputing that it doesn't do much for the article. --Fastfission 00:52, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Besides showing that North Korea is proud of their supposed achievement and thus broadcasted the news on their television programming, it serves no point for the article.-Cooter285 01:58, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. I think that it goes a long way in giving a visual face to the paragraph it's placed in, thus enhancing the article. I think that this is valid fair use, but the user should give a proper rationale. —msikma <user_talk:msikma> 06:11, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Msikma that it should be kept. I would certainly argue it is fair use, since it is the official first-hand reporting from North Korea's government of their own action, and as such is a primary source. The NY Times would also be using it under fair use and do not have any rights to it since it has not been altered in any way. TH 11:14, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't really give a visual face, though. We have no evidence that she's the woman who gave the statement; I'm not even sure if that's the same news station that made them. She's supposedly a newscaster who later said how happy they should all be. It's not quite the same thing. My fear is that it's really there just so people can think, "my, they do look different from us," though that might be a bit cynical of me. --Fastfission 01:23, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

I would keep it. I think it adds a lot to the paragraph. —Mets501 (talk) 18:59, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

While I'd love to say that it should be kept, unless there's some way to confirm that the topic of the broadcast was the test (i.e. with a video), that shot is useless. She could be talking about the weather, or kimchee. Delete.

Not sure about the fair use discussion, but I can confirm that the screen shot does appear to be from the broadcast on KCNA in which the statement announcing the nuclear test was read. The KCNA nightly news broadcasts are posted online, and the screen shot matches the relevant part from Oct. 9. Unfortunately, the Oct. 9 video file is no longer there, so I can't give a link. They only offer the past few days at any given time. --Reuben 00:01, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

I would second Reuben; the screenshot appears to be legitimate (it closely matches the actual broadcast snippet, which has been widely rebroadcast here in the South). IMO the fair use claim is legit, at least per {{tv-screenshot}}; this picture is certainly useful "for identification and critical commentary on the station ID or program and its contents" (in this case, the North Korean announcement of the test). I'm not a big fan of fair-use images, but if we're going to keep any screenshots at all, I think this should probably be among them. -- Visviva 15:58, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

I believe it does illustrate the emotional content of the news broadcast, if it is an actual screenshot of it I say it should be not deleted JunCTionS 13:20, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

If it's actually the original broadcast, then I'd say we should keep it. I think it is a pretty mild fair use risk — it is not an excessively creative image, it does add some value to the article (if it is legit), and state-owned copyrights are not usually enforced for simple things like this from what I can tell (as long as we aren't trying to do anything dodgy with it). --Fastfission 15:08, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I added a more detailed fair use rationale. I think it's a keep now. --Fastfission 23:14, 16 October 2006 (UTC)