Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2011 February 23

< February 22	February 24 >

February 23[edit]

File:HS OWL.jpg[edit]

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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:01, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

orphan, obsolete (File:Hochschule Ostwestfalen-Lippe-logo.svg) -- 92.227.152.79 (talk) 06:22, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Replacement is good. Reh man 08:15, 28 February 2011 (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.

File:Palm Tree.jpg[edit]

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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, low encyclopedic value Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:46, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:23, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Admin comment: Due to what seems to be a bug in Twinkle, this listing had been removed from its proper place. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:23, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, low encyclopedic use. Could be moved to Commons to a more regional-specific category, if more locale details can be provided... Reh man 08:18, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unless the building is special the photo should be deleted. --MGA73 (talk) 17:01, 1 March 2011 (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.

File:AS149.jpg[edit]

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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The file is not free and I'm pretty sure it fails fair use as it is currently only used for cosmetic purpose. There is no way to use critically comment on the image itself. Unless discussion centers on her face which does not make sense in this article. Fixer23 (talk) 10:00, 23 February 2011 (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.

File:Signal transduction pathways.jpg[edit]

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 as obsolete. BigDom talk 08:26, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Text says it is from a book. 62.243.126.154 (talk) 15:48, 23 February 2011 (UTC) thumb[reply]

File:Signal transduction pathways.jpg has been superseded by File:Signal transduction v1.png (right), and may very well be deleted. Mikael Häggström (talk) 17:25, 23 February 2011 (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.

File:Team 2.jpg[edit]

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 BigDom talk 08:24, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and bad description. Could perhaps be Christian Heritage Academy but colours are wrong. 62.243.126.154 (talk) 15:55, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Probably some private event. Reh man 08:19, 28 February 2011 (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.

File:Aaliyah in blue.jpg[edit]

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: speedy deletion per CSD F7 as a commercial news agency picture. Note that the "she's dead so it's non-replaceable" isn't in fact a valid argument in terms of justifying a real-world legal fair use claim and cannot outweigh the NFCC#2 failure. In this case, even if a truly free image cannot be found (have people tried acquiring one from private sources?) a replacement with another non-free image that at least doesn't have the same commercial impact would be possible and preferable – for instance one of the CD covers that we are already using elsewhere. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:40, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete as blatantly failing at least two polocies. First Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria - criteria number 2 -Respect for commercial opportunities. Second is Wikipedia:CSD#F7 - Non-free images or media from a commercial source (e.g., Associated Press, Getty), where the file itself is not the subject of sourced commentary, are considered an invalid claim of fair use and fail the strict requirements of WP:NFCC; and may be deleted immediately. This was an F7 nom and was "declined" because the "subject is deceased so a fair use claim can be made" (which is an invalid reason for a decline as that rationale does not apply to content from commercial content providers) and to send this here. This is just an unneeded step in a very clear process set forth at CSD. The image is not even close to meeting the requirements for this type of content. Soundvisions1 (talk) 23:13, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, obviously. As for the speedy portion, even though it obviously should be, that would constitute wheel warring (see previous deletion log) and you're probably not going to find an admin wanting to do that. --B (talk) 00:15, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I restored it back in 2009 because it was deleted due to this revision after the fair use rationale and license was removed by a vandal. It didn't exactly have anything to do with the copyright owner of the image, which is the nom's rationale. Just thought I'd point that out. — ξ ^xplicit 00:40, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: As Explicit said that had nothing to do with the image being from a commercial content provider. Also it wouldn't be wheel warning because that was done in 2009. Soundvisions1 (talk) 03:10, 24 February 2011 (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.