Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 February 18



File:TheFeast.jpg

 * 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 AnomieBOT ⚡  22:13, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * File:TheFeast.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]) – uploaded by Docued ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads).


 * Orphaned, Low Quality, Unencyclopedic, use not stated, very likely a copyvio - uploader has a long history of uploading copyvios. -  F ASTILY  (T ALK )
 * Delete, caption seems to indicate that this isn't the work of the uploader, and thus there's no evidence to believe that it's a free image. Nyttend (talk) 14:27, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * 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.

File:Bradley Quinn.jpg

 * 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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:29, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * File:Bradley Quinn.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]) – uploaded by Suede67 ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads).


 * Delete: the image is used in the infobox of an article about the subject of the image, so it fails WP:NFCC as replaceable because he is alive, even though it is claimed the image is not replaceable. To add confusion to the fair-use claim, there is a claim of permission however no free licence copyright tag has been applied nor, apparently, has any OTRS permission been sent or received. ww2censor (talk) 04:18, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, even if the claimed permission is valid, it appears to be permission to use on Wikipedia, not permission to use the image under a free license. Nyttend (talk) 14:31, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - Image is marked as non-free and is likely replaceable by a freer one.--Rockfang (talk) 07:38, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
 * 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.

File:Taj and minar.jpg

 * 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 AnomieBOT ⚡  02:01, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 * File:Taj and minar.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]) – uploaded by Nemonoman ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads).

*Delete, useless if we don't know what it is. I suspect that it's a comparison of the height of the Taj Mahal with the height of some famous minaret, but I don't know which one — it would be quite a difficult search to find the specific minaret. Nyttend (talk) 06:33, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Unused; no context provided for encyclopedic use. I'm not sure what this is trying to illustrate. It looks like potential original research. —Bkell (talk) 08:11, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep, the image appears to be useful. Look at this version of Taj Mahal, where the image is in use: it compares the building's height with the height of the Qutb Minar, the world's tallest brick minaret.  Nyttend (talk) 06:35, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - as original research.--Rockfang (talk) 07:41, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
 * How? If we know how tall two buildings are (surely we have the sources for that), it's not original research to put them in an image together and compare their heights.  Nyttend (talk) 23:29, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete See WP:SYNTH - it would nead a reliable source stating the comparison between the two. Also, there's no proof (or even an assertion that I can find) that the two original pictures are the same scale. VernoWhitney (talk) 21:07, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * That's a very good point; I'd forgotten to consider that. Changing my vote to Delete based on the lack of sources.  Nyttend (talk) 15:16, 24 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete, fails WP:OI. Stifle (talk) 12:08, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * 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.

File:Human migrationpaleo.gif

 * 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 AnomieBOT ⚡  02:01, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 * File:Human migrationpaleo.gif ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]) – uploaded by Buzzzsherman ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads).


 * Multiple problems — (1) This is marked as GFDL, plus the "permission" line includes reference to an unspecified CC-BY license; however, the source webpage says nothing about licensing. I'll welcome a correction, but I can't find any evidence that this is not all-rights-reserved.  (2) The source webpage is a self-published site created by a single individual.  While original research doesn't generally include images, this image is different — rather than being a photograph, it's one person's drawing that conveys his impression of a historical process.  This is not substantially different from a narrative of early human migrations: its arrows and numbers need to be backed up by reliable sources, but there's no evidence of that. Nyttend (talk) 14:26, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok i made it ..so what do you kids need..to keep it??? i am the one that posted it to that web site long ago Legal..Buzzzsherman (talk) 16:20, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * You haven't proven that you made it, and as it shows original ideas, there are much bigger problems than licensing. Nyttend (talk) 14:23, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * O i see what your saying ..I did make it, but like you say it has original research this is true...I can only provide papers that i have written on the matter, showing this time line (that yes is at best a guess).. Could i make a new one that has no dates, but will still be a out of Africa map is that ok?...PS if your looking at this one perhaps we should talk about File:Y and C Haplogroups for NA.JPG that i also made  with the same sort of time frame!... All the best Buzzzsherman (talk) 23:45, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's the basic issue — if licensing were the only issue, surely another image could be created showing identical information. Could you add notes on the image description pages for both of these images that cite the RS (or RS-es) that you've used to produce these?  If so, I'll not complain.  Nyttend (talk) 03:25, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok i am not sure what you mean by (RS-es). Do you need me to email you something? Sorry about this i am old to wiki but new to the photo side of things..i will read the wikiwas on all this and get back to you.
 * RS = reliable source and RS-es = reliable sources; sorry to have confused you. You should cite sources for creating this image on its description, but that won't avoid the copyright issues; if you have the sources to back up the ideas conveyed by this image, you'll need to create it anew from a free image, such as those found in Commons:Category:Blank maps of the world.  Nyttend (talk) 06:30, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok lets delete this and i will re-doit with nodates ..Buzzzsherman (talk) 05:36, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - as original research.--Rockfang (talk) 07:46, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as author requests deletion per comments above. 70.29.210.242 (talk) 07:45, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * 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.

File:Laurel and Hardy.jpg

 * 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 AnomieBOT ⚡  02:01, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 * File:Laurel and Hardy.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]) – uploaded by Hottentot ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads).


 * Replacable image File:Laurel and Hardy in Lucky Dog.jpg exists in commons Vssun (talk) 15:04, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, the Commons image will suffice for identification; it might even be more useful, because it shows the two in a movie. Nyttend (talk) 03:27, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
 * 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.

File:GLCWesDoe.jpg

 * 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 AnomieBOT ⚡  02:01, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 * File:GLCWesDoe.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]) – uploaded by Wshinault ( [ notify] | contribs | uploads).


 * Orphaned, low quality, use not stated, unencyclopedic vanity photo. -  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 20:46, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, useless; no point in shipping to Commons, as this would plainly be out of scope. Nyttend (talk) 03:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
 * 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.