User talk:Peripitus/Archive9

Hello, I would like to explain the photos which you commented on today - I am in charge of marketing for the University of Ostrava and I have been given the photos by the respective departments and by my friend, a photographer, for these reasons. Unfortunatelly, I have not been able to complete any "copyright" form on Wikipedia successfully which is why - to make it easier for me as a beginner - I have claimed that the photos are mine, which I am sure the authors that had given those photos to me - would confirm if asked. I would be very happy if I managed to do all the copyrights all right. If you really mind, feel free to delete the photos or give me advice please how to solve it in the simplest manner. Thank you once again for your careful supervision of my contributions and have a nice day Sona Siepakova Madevasasha Madevasasha (talk) 12:02, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

River Torrens
Sorry, I know I'm a bit slow, but I don't see a relationship between your edit and your edit comment. Could I bother you to enlighten me please? Thanks in advance, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:14, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * OK. NOW I get it. Pdfpdf (talk) 13:15, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

St. Thomas Cross - Deleted without consensus?
Hi, I'm surprised to see the file,, be deleted by you regardless of reaching any consensus in the discussion here:. -- AshLey  Msg 10:46, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, Let it go, if my justifications are not sufficient. Please feel free to close the discussion here:Files_for_deletion/2012_May_4 -- AshLey  Msg 11:05, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Carrick, Tasmania
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:02, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Raiders of the Lost Ark - Key Art by Tom Jung.jpg
Hi Peripitus - I uploaded this file again after adjusting the article by adding a new section to provide specific references to the image - I am trying to avoid wasting time going back and forth over the original issue - I was hoping this would end the dispute? Jobrjobr

Peripitus - I received the following Help response;


 * The discussion you took part in was not "Deletion review", it was a "Files for deletion" discussion here. That was closed as delete by an admin, user Peripitus (talk). After that, you can't just upload the image again so, the second time you did, it was speedy-deleted. If you want to challenge the decision, you should first ask Peripitus; then, if not satisfied, you can go to WP:Deletion review. Read the instructions there carefully. The point at issue is that copyright (non-free) images can only be included under very strict conditions - see WP:Non-free content criteria, where they must satisfy all ten of the conditions listed under "Policy". JohnCD (talk) 14:43, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Could you tell me your thinking on deleting this file after the "Files for Deletion" discussion? Would rather not go through/does not seem necessary to go through the process of "Deletion Review" given the subject of the article, the references in the article and the image being of a movie poster. Thank you. Jobrjobr


 * Thank you for the detailed reply Peripitus/appreciate your understanding - My apologies for this insanity, but I am a bit new here - The use of movie poster images and related fair use rationale has been difficult to deal with given how they have been handled in the past and outside of Wikipedia. Note that the illustrators like Tom Jung gave away their copyright when they sold the images to the studios.


 * I have been working with the Academy Library on a legacy project for Tom Jung for a while now - The image that is in question provides unusual insight for the reader into the creative process, the business of movie poster art and the unique talent of Tom to bring characters to life. I have updated the article with a new section on "Raiders of the Lost Ark" that is referenced and specifically describes the image to the reader - Could you take a look and let me know if this will work? Thank you. Jobrjobr


 * Peripitus I have updated the Richard Amsel article with the original Raiders of the Lost Ark image after adding a proper fair use rationale. This helps tie the two articles together regarding the creation of the Key Art for Raiders of the Lost Ark - If you could take a look when you get a chance - Thanks. Jobrjobr (talk) 17:04, 11 June 2012 (UTC)


 * -Peripitus if you can point out a source for commentary on Amsel's Raiders poster art it would be appreciated/I will use it. My experience is that much of what was written was too early/never made it online - For example I had to dredge up an old physical copy of the magazine Cinemafantastiqe from the early 90's to use as a references for the Tom Jung article.
 * -I used the style A poster because it was the first concept/original concept, similar to Tom Jung's.
 * -I cleaned up the reference you referred to - Amsel's Raiders poster is at the Academy Library, properly credited and can be viewed online.
 * -Could you take a look at the Tom Jung article again? I have included a new referenced section that describes the Tom Jung Raiders key art. I would like to re-insert the previously deleted image in the article. Thank you. Jobrjobr (talk) 08:26, 14 June 2012 (UTC)Jobrjobr (talk) 01:29, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

TATA nano interior image being deleted
Could you please provide your version of "What is a public domain?" the images are taken from manufacturer and its being uploaded for the same product. before deletion you could have had a discussion. If somebody has put up your photo in your profile, is it a violation of copyright? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 007india (talk • contribs) 13:09, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

I didn't understand. The images are taken from manufacturer's website only. They are not remastered or altered in anyway. The image doesn't have any copyright mark/notice, the image is used for product info for the same product only.

Even in the above case, if you are undoing a change you must put it back with the previous image which was already there. Please do it. The article is paralyzed one. Nevertheless I'm not convinced with your action and lets take it for a moderation. Please revert back all the images which were there before my update and till the moderation is closed no further changes are required from either side.

based on the justification you have provided, nobody can upload images in wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.4.124.12 (talk) 15:05, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to jump in, but yes: purchase or borrow a camera, and upload pictures you take yourself. Maybe there's even a Tata showroom in your town?  Mr.choppers &#124;  ✎  19:26, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Just thought I'd say....
...great to see you editing again! I'd love to work on some SA geography articles with you once these curséd exams are done with. --Yeti Hunter (talk) 12:40, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Request for removing template
Sir, First of all good evening and you have added a template for File:Prabhas poster.jpg that This file may fail Wikipedia's first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a free image might reasonably be found or created that adequately provides the same information, or which could be adequately covered with text alone.Sir actually i have added the information in Replaceability section that it is Protected by copyright, therefore a free use alternative won't exist.So sir,please remove the template if you have satisfied with my point of view and information about the image file in Replaceability section.If you do not want to remove the template please tell me the reason by posting me a message to my user talk page sir i.e,. (Talk).Thanking you sir.Have a nice day. Raghusri 09:52, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Thankyou for the info
Sir, Thankingyou for the info.My doubt is If i update the image file by adding a alternate image having public domain, creative commons or similar licenses then the template would be removed.If it is right please post me a message to my user talk page sir i.e., (Talk). Raghusri 10:04, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Citing an image
Hello, Peripitus!

I got the message on my talk page about File:Rocco_Leo_Gaglioti.jpg being marked for deletion if I don't change the info. I would like help with this, if you would please take the time to help me. I have two problems: one, I can't figure out for the life of me how to edit the image's description only; two is that I was given permission from the subject of the photo to use it in his Wikipedia article, but he did not inform me who took the photo. It was also taken off of his personal Facebook profile, meaning that to link to the original image would encroach on his privacy. In these overly-complicated circumstances, who would I say the copyright belonged to, or do I need to find a more well-documented photo? Finally, if I cannot get the required information before the image is deleted, am I allowed to resubmit it with updated information? Sorry for the trouble! Thank you! Alana Gilston (talk) 10:14, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Hello again!
 * Thank you very much for the help! It really did help a lot! I do have one more question, if you'd be so kind--it says on the Permission page that I am supposed to e-mail Mr. Gaglioti asking for permission (which I will have no idea how to do, considering he already gave me permission), then e-mail the original request as well as consent messages to the Wikimedia information team. Finally, I am supposed to add OTRS pending to the image description. Is this correct? Thank you again for all the help!
 * Alana Gilston (talk) 11:01, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Maybe I should mix this up a little... greetings, earthling!
 * Ahem, sorry. Anyway, thanks very much for the help! Mr. Gaglioti said he would gladly give me permission if I send him the formal letter, so I just need to do that. If I have any more questions, I'll make sure to bug you about them again! *wink* Again, thank you!
 * Alana Gilston (talk) 22:21, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Thankyou
Ok sir thankyou.I will try to upload a new type of alternate image i.e., (copyrighted and of a living person) and Wikipedia does not host.Raghusri (Talk) Raghusri 10:48, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

A replaceable file
A free replacement can be found or created for File:Prabhas poster.jpg because it is released in public domain by its author,i have added this to the licensing information.Is this info reliable.Please post me a message to my user talk page if it was. Raghusri (Talk) Raghusri 13:25, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Hadspen, Tasmania
Yngvadottir (talk) 08:03, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Nikon D3200 ISO Dxomark dynamic range comparison Nikon D3S Canon 5DMK3.gif
I hope the reason is enough: Data to create such an image are not published. A low resolution screenshot was used.

This image is REALLY needed to discuss the dynamic range. Tagremover (talk) 10:35, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Please advice
Please advice: can I add fair-use images also to List of painters of Saint Petersburg Union of Artists, or in the artist biography only? Thank you! Leningradartist (talk) 13:21, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Input
Please, would you help the Comet_(programming) article again? --damiens.rf 16:52, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Gage Golightly
What can I use? This is entirely too much trouble to just upload one small image. --ArchangelV2 (talk) 07:45, 28 June 2012 (UTC)ArchangelV2

Seriously? I have never had an issue like this on other wikias. Why are the copyright policies here so strict?--ArchangelV2 (talk) 00:10, 29 June 2012 (UTC)ArchangelV2

Why did I not have a user page?
Why was I lacking one until a little while ago? When I typed my name in the box on my user account then one appeared. Why was this? This was after I clicked on my name and I was asked if I wanted to create a page for this user (me). --ArchangelV2 (talk) 00:12, 29 June 2012 (UTC)ArchangelV2

No image caption or talk page notification of files tagged for deletion
I just noticed that the file File:Walk-away-video.jpg was deleted after a file for deletion discussion in which you were the only editor to voice an opinion. Is there some reason you did not add an image caption to the file at Walk Away (Kelly Clarkson song) or add a notification at Talk:Walk Away (Kelly Clarkson song) as Files for deletion suggest you do? Had there been some sort of notification, I would have added to the discussion and possibly some other editors may have too. As much discussion as possible between editors cannot hurt the situation. Looking at your more recent files for discussion, it you also did not notify for them either. I am going to tag the files that are currently in use about the discussion so other editors know about them. Aspects (talk) 03:05, 2 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I do not understand how you could respond with "...am not sure in this case why there would have been any benefit to do so." I specifically stated that I would have joined the discussion had there been some notification and other editors may have joined in too. I would advise you to either tag the image or post a notification on the talk page if an image you bring to FfD are still in use, because editors are far more likely to be watching articles and their respective talk pages than they are to be watching individual images that are being used in the articles. Aspects (talk) 23:51, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Images
Hi, one of the images you nominated has just been deleted, which is a shame. However, if I added Reception percfically talking about that scene, could I? This image for example, does the same thing File:Wishin' and Hopin' - Grey's Anatomy.jpg. — M.Mario  (T/C) 16:39, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for that, it was much clearer that what other users have said! You know the user who uploaded that image I used as an example, I would look at the rest of his uploads, they all have the same rationale, and seem a bit dogdy. — M.Mario  (T/C) 21:21, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi again! Im currently reviewing a few articles at GA, and I was wondering whether the images on them are intact or not.


 * File:SGMWH Merger.jpg - Its not even a significant plot picture.
 * File:Good Mourning Grey's Anatomy.jpg - Not one of mine, but looks bad.
 * File:I Like You So Much Better When You're Naked.jpg
 * File:Great Expectations - Grey's Anatomy 3x13.jpg
 * File:Time Has Come Today - Grey's Anatomy.jpg

- I hate to report photos- its just I dont want to pass an article- but then recieve backlash. Thank you very much. — M.Mario  (T/C) 19:14, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Madonna Infobox Picture
Hello! Please view this thread: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Madonna_%28entertainer%29#Madonna_infobox It explains we have permission to use this picture: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MDNAVogue.jpg

Editors chose that picture but felt it was too dark and had to be cropped. I lightened, cropped it and posted it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MDNA_Vogue.jpg. In a nutshell, I simply edited a file we have permission to use at editors' request. Were there other/different steps I should have taken? Israell (talk) 11:02, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Tell PETA my mink is dragging on the floor
The entire root of the "edit-warring" dispute is over using the iTunes version over the official version, according to Kanye West. https://twitter.com/kanyewest/status/213686642689581058. The majority of my edits were not related to changing music covers prior to the incident, while the majority of Jizzy's is. Take note how a wide majority of his covers are deleted in the edits he makes, and his history for taking the iTunes cover (which, to my knowledge, cannot be changed) over the artists' official word. I'm sorry if my cry of "can't a young nigga get money anymore" offends you, but being partisan to the whole issue is just being grossly unfair. Lastly, please don't make personal attacks either. You're an administrator, act like it. Ellomate (talk) 14:22, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Ellomate, just because you have what you think are valid reasons for playing tennis with images, doesn't make it any more sensible. Discuss the changes on talk pages, come to a consensus position, then make the change. Which cover is displayed, or if any is displayed, is simply not really important - Peripitus (Talk) 22:12, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for moving the discussion to my page; but I think it should stay here. Let me address your comments one by one. If the cover is not important, why revert to the earlier one or keep it for that matter? Moreover, why are you reverting it to the revertee's version (Jizzy's, the older one) and not the current one mine? This is not a case of "he started it", but if you are so obliged to disregard the cover art's importance, why not delete it altogether? Regarding "making a discussion on the talk page", I have also attempted to create a discussion on the cover art a month ago, to no avail. I think Jizzy30 and any other concerned editor should join in this conversation, as I find your insulting me while while completely ignoring Jizzy troubling. Ellomate (talk) 22:35, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

JLo pics
Hey! I see u deleted the JLo images. Can u help me out with the licese? The Flickr page says cc-by-2.0 as the license, permitting the non-commercial free use of the image. Maybe u can give me a hand so that them can be re-uploaded. Thanks. — Hahc 21  16:14, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Air New Zealand Airbus A320.jpg

 * Why have you tagged Air New Zealand Airbus A320.jpg this file for deletion? PumpkinSky told me it does not fail the non-free criteria.--Anderson9990 - what's up? 03:16, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Pictures by JLo
Hey! Rememeber the talk we had? Well, the owner changed the rights of the pictures. I want you to check them first and tell me of they can be uploaded now. i'd appreciate a lot your help in this thing. Here's the link to one of the images:. Regards. — Hahc 21  04:09, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Help?
If one of my images I have uploaded has a strong rationale and helps the reader understand the article better, but has been nominated for deletion, what can I do? File:Society Hill (Body of Proof).jpg was nominated, however the nominator has been rather rude towards me, and has not allowed me to get my point across,. I tried to explain to him, and although I may have made mistakes, I feel the image fits the criteria. If your free, can you put your point across? — M.Mario  (T/C) 15:33, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Deletion review consideration
I see that you closed. At the time of the close there were three keeps and three deletes, plus the nominator. The keeps seemed to think that the image illustrated the subject in a manner that is common for webpage screenshots and useful to the reader. The deletes seemed to question the necessity of the image for the reader. However, one of the delete votes came at 21:08, 12 July 2012 (UTC). Between 20:10 and 21:50, 12 July 2012‎ Barack Obama on Twitter was unstable and it is not even clear what version of the page the voter was reviewing. In addition, since when is 3 votes to 3 considered a consensus to delete if the keeps are making cogent arguments. I am considering a deletion review.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:04, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Why Did You Delete My Pics
I would like to ask why you deleted my photos, uploaded, and added to the Range Rover Evoque article. After uploading them, I suddenly received messages asking that I add tags to them. I went to go do that, and poof, you deleted my photos, and took them off that article. I would like to know why? Why did you do that? Can you give someone, at least two-three minutes to add tags, after receiving a message to do so? Coolboygcp (talk) 20:30, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Did you even read the deletion discussion? - File:Artist Cygnus high.jpg
I'm furious because you came to a decision that is entirely inconsistent with what was discussed. I demand for you to tell me how you came to this conclusion.--Craigboy (talk) 02:12, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Indiana Jones
Hi Peripitus - Could you take a look at the Tom Jung article again? Finally have most of the research in the article - I have included a new referenced section that describes the Tom Jung Raiders key art. I would like to re-insert the previously deleted image in the article from a while back. Also did some clean up on the Richard Amsel article for his version of Indiana Jones. Thank you in advance. Jobrjobr (talk) 02:33, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Donna Rice pictures
Thanks for the comment. I am unclear on what defines fair use but will read on. I figured since it was a public picture on the EIE website it was good for use on Wiki. I even emailed the EIE organization for permission but have not heard back, yet. I wanted to place a positive picture of the subject to balanced the 'tawdry' 'free use' one on the page. Will pursue it further. Thanks.--Bf2002 (talk) 23:27, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for notifying me about the deletion
Some of the folks over Commons do not even bother telling you they delete your upload. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ebaychatter0 (talk • contribs) 04:21, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Help on editing an image
You've deleted the image. That's fine. I trust that you understand all the image policies/guidelines. However, the image copyrights clearly state that derivative works are acceptable as long as the original work and copyright are identified. So how do I do this properly so it will not be deleted once again? --Ronz (talk) 15:35, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

File:Frasier Crane Diane Chambers.jpg
Ping, you have replies at. --George Ho (talk) 17:55, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

File:Micaela Schaefer Men In Black 3 Movie Premiere.jpg
Hello. I understand why the file was deleted. But I did not understand how to add a correct copyright to the file? I would really like to upload that file and I would really like to learn how it would be done appropriately. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PrinceOthman (talk • contribs) 14:02, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Servis article
I've added images which are none-free as I didn't but Servis did!Wouuld you like me to explain what None-free is?I provided who is the author is and u still like hitting the delete button! If u want ur conscience to be relaxed give ur email so u can upload the pics urself!

seriously shabby image deletion based on flawed discussion
Hi Peripitus,

Did you read the discussion at before you went ahead and deleted the image? As far as I can tell the arguments made were weak and off-topic, and none of my responses were ever reexamined by the commenters. I’m quite upset that you considered that “discussion” to have found “consensus”. I thought Wikipedia discussions were based on considering arguments and reason, rather than tallying supporters (apparently 2? 3?). I would appreciate it if you reinstate the image, until such a time as a convincing argument is made for its deletion. Thanks. –jacobolus (t) 08:26, 22 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Hello? Are you around, Peripitus? Could you please put this image back pending a real discussion? I’ll make notes about it at the article talk page and the relevant wikiprojects, and we can actually reach some real consensus based on rational argument rather than the whims of a couple overzealous editors. –jacobolus (t) 01:34, 25 September 2012 (UTC)


 * jacobolus, I think you are confusing your strength of feeling about this image with it's adherence to non-free content policy here. A summary of the arguments put by the three other contributors to the debate could be - "this image could be replaced either by text or a freely licenced image without significantly impairing reader's understanding of the topic" as the debate was on the basis of NFCC#1 and WP:NFCC#8. While I understand your feelings on this, you did not adequately demonstrate why this particular image meets the criteria and why those seeking to delete it where incorrect. - Peripitus (Talk) 11:17, 28 September 2012 (UTC)


 * About #1: no free equivalent was demonstrated, nor was it explained how a free equivalent would be found. About #8, the sentence or two of text is substantially less informative and less fascinating than text accompanied by a picture. As far as I can tell none of the participants in the discussion ever made a basic effort to either (a) look at the context, read the article, and think about the perspective of a prospective reader, (b) engage with discussion, (c) back up arguments by reasoning. The original request for deletion was on the basis of a one sentence statement which is clearly false and its author never bothered to reply later.
 * I thought the discussion was over with and those proposing deletion had given up after a few weeks went by, and none of them replied. But then out of the blue you decided to delete the image. I don’t know if that’s how things usually work, but I found it quite frustrating/insulting. The way the conversation went, I felt like I was talking to a brick wall, which then at the end decided to fall down on me. I’d appreciate if you put the image back, and I’ll place some notice up at relevant talk pages, and we can see about getting other interested editors involved in a more complete discussion. –jacobolus (t) 16:05, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Erin Sullivan bio pic
Hey. I asked Erin Sullivan (actress) to email permissions and she did. Did you not receive it yet? Thanks. ~dee ( talk? ) 11:32, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Peripitus. No, I don't have copies of the emails. I'll ask her to forward it to me though and I can then forward it onto you? Erin's and Ken Mahoney's. ~dee  ( talk? ) 09:11, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi again Peripitus. Erin sent a new email, at the recommendation of another admin. Do you mind having a look and letting me know if you can undelete the image? Thanks. ~dee  ( talk? ) 13:15, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Feedback on my Easy Media uploader Proposal
Hi there, I noticed your a great contributor of high quality media on Commons and articles. I'd love your thoughts and support if you feel its a worthwhile project on my proposal to implement photo uploading from article pages.

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:IEG/Easy_Media_Uploader

Thanks, Ash Making experiences more meaningful and less-broken. (talk) 22:32, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Dodge City (1939 film) dvd boxart.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Dodge City (1939 film) dvd boxart.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:47, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

RfC:Infobox Road proposal
WP:AURD (Australian Roads), is inviting comment on a proposal to convert Australian road articles to. Please come and discuss. The vote will be after concerns have been looked into.


 * Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian Roads/RfC:Infobox Road proposal

You are being notified as a member on the list of WP:AUS

Nbound (talk) 06:14, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Boxing Posters Restoration
I have no idea why you felt the need to delete every one of those posters after a debate in which no clear result was chosen, but they should be restored at least for the time being. There have been several discussions about that matter including on Files for deletion/2013 June 8 and on Wikipedia talk:Non-free content, we have yet to come to an official agreement on whether or not these images should be retained or deleted, so until then your restoration of those images would be greatly appreciated. Beast from da East (talk) 02:39, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * None of the images that you deleted were orphaned at the time. They all served as the primary image on their related articles. (EX: File:Bowe vs Holyfield 2.jpg was linked to Riddick Bowe vs. Evander Holyfield II and so on and so forth) Beast from da East (talk) 18:10, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, can you at least restore the images until an official decision is made? It makes little to no sense to just delete a select few poster and keep the dozens upon dozens of other posters. The discussion you came upon was several months old and was succeeded by several other discussions that have yet to be resolved. Beast from da East (talk) 01:55, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note that Beast has raised this at Deletion review/Log/2013 October 5, apparently without notifying you. Nyttend (talk) 03:21, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Deletion review for Files for deletion/2013 April 24
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Files for deletion/2013 April 24. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Also affected: Files for deletion/2013 June 8. Stefan2 (talk) 16:06, 6 October 2013 (UTC)