Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2013 January 24

< January 23	January 25 >

January 24

File:Innes McCartney.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear source and licensing. The uploader first tagged it as PD, but later added {{non-free promotional}}. If the image is legitimately free, then we need verified permission as its use elsewhere (a la here) predates upload to Wikipedia. If it is legitimately non-free then its use fails WP:NFCC#1. VernoWhitney (talk) 01:20, 24 January 2013 (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:AR New Image 737-700.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Now that the livery is in use, this is replaceable :Jay8g ^{Hi!- I am... -What I do...} _{WASH- BRIDGE- WPWA - MFIC} 04:21, 24 January 2013 (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:BBC Radio Times George V Royal Funeral January 28, 1936.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 as G7 by RHaworth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:09, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Over-restored and over-cropped copy of File:Radio Times - page for George V funeral - 28 January 1936.jpg; see discussion at Wikipedia:Graphics_Lab/Photography_workshop#Bundy_clock_in_the_Sun. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:25, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This derivative image (see below) is neither "over-restored" nor "over-cropped" (whatever that is supposed to mean), nor are either of these highly subjective claims even stated criteria for deletion. The image is correctly licensed as public domain, accurately illustrates the subject, and in fact was actually uploaded as a derivative image at the suggestion of the user who now proposes its deletion! Centpacrr (talk) 13:33, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Original"
"Derivative"

"Derivative"

I didn't suggest you upload it; I said you were entitled to (rather than overwriting the original, as you had done) - just as the community is entitled to decide where to keep it. It's over-cropped because it looses the text outside the square border, and over restored because you have apparently redone the lettering (per the prior discussion to which I linked), creating a false impression of the appearance of the original publication and thus inaccurately illustrating the subject. The licensing is not disputed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:10, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The text outside the border is cropped out because it is neither legible nor recoverable in the original and therefore is of no value to the purpose of the illustration. The text "Arrangements will be announced over the microphone" is also not legible in the original small file but has been digitally restored to be so in the derivative image which is completely appropriate and does not in any way render it as an "inaccurate" digital representation of the original document but instead enhances it to serve that function. Centpacrr (talk) 16:26, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - It's an inferior reworking of this. New text has been pasted in over the old, and the current version has parts of the original cropped out. Being an inaccurate mockup of another file it has no legitimate use either on WP or Commons, not to mention it's description makes no mention of either the original file or an accurate description of the various modifications. Centpacrr didn't like the idea of his work being criticized, so he's attempting to do some sort of neurotic end run with this upload. – JBarta (talk) 16:41, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The summary I posted says "(Digitally restored derivative image)" but you are free to ignore that I suppose. Apparently no good deed (making the recoverable text legible and cropping out that which is neither recoverable or relevant) goes unpunished. So have it your way and delete it (which I have now requested myself) and I'll not bother working on any more image requests from this user even though he suggested that is post this derivative version in the first place. (NOTE RE COMMENTS: While all users are free to disagree with the actions or approaches of other users and say so, gratuitous public speculation as to fellow contributors' motives or mental state is unhelpful, inappropriate, and reveals a failure to assume good faith.) Centpacrr (talk) 17:15, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Centpacrr, in all honesty, you wore out your allotment of good faith a long time ago. – JBarta (talk) 18:19, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I stand by my comment and request that you not speculate about either my motives or mental state. That is really not appropriate. As for "assuming good faith" does that also mean that I am supposed to accept in good faith your claim made in my talk page last February 24 -- apparently for the purpose of intimidating me from ever challenging your views on anything -- that: "I am prohibited from publicly divulging personal or identifying information for I am in the U.S. Witness Protection Program, currently residing in New Jersey. In the not too distant past I was an enforcer and occasional assassin for a well known crime syndicate. I'll stop there because (and trust me on this) you don't want me to go any further than that."? If true, that seems to me to be a foolish admission to make publicly on Wikipedia and/or the internet on which IPs can easily be traced. If not, then it seems to me that it was made purely to intimidate another user with which you disagree and is thus a gross violation of WP:AGF, WP:HA, and a variety of other WP policies. So that I and others may know how to interact (or not) with you in the future on WP, please tell me which this claim is: true or false?

That being said the file has now also been speedy deleted at my request so the discussion in here as to its value is now moot. Centpacrr (talk) 19:21, 24 January 2013 (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:Keep Your Head Down Japanese Single CD&DVD Cover.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8 due to File:Tohoshinki - Why (Keep Your Head Down).jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 12:39, 24 January 2013 (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:Tohoshinki - Superstar (CD+DVD).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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8 because of File:Superstar CD Cover.jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 12:42, 24 January 2013 (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:Tohoshinki - Winter (CD+DVD).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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8 due to File:Tohoshinki - Winter.jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 12:44, 24 January 2013 (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:Still Cover.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 Chick Bowen (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:14, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8 due to File:Tohoshinki - Still.jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 12:44, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Passes WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8 as stated on Template:Infobox album, "An alternate cover that is significantly different from the original and is widely distributed and/or replaces the original has generally been held to pass this criterion.", that can be applied to singles. Aspects (talk) 07:10, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I have no idea who came up with that ridiculous rationale for alternate covers, but definitely does not hold up against WP:NFCC. Alternate covers for books aren't used because they don't comply with NFCC, and album/single covers are no different. In these types of cases especially, because this alternate cover in no way replaces the original. Japanese singles and albums, and to a far less extent, Korean singles and albums, are pretty much guaranteed because they are released in a few editions: CD-only, CD+DVD, and whatever other edition they decide (CD+2DVD, CD+Blu-ray, box edition, Mu-Mo edition, Lawson edition, <record company> edition, etc.). Unless you're like Yuya Matsushita, where some of his singles have up to eight covers in total, or an album like Mr. Simple, which actually has 15 in total. These alternate covers are entirely unjustifiable. — ξ^xplicit 01:57, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The criterion orginally arose after extensive workshopping at WP:ALBUMS, and has since been run past WT:NFC a number of times (check archives), in an attempt to summarise the results of various FfD discussions, as to when files had been deleted and when they had been kept, and to provide workable guidance going forward. The analogy with book covers is questionable. Book covers generally have a "shelflife", and tend to be routinely "refreshed" every few years. They tend not to have the same iconic identification with the product that album covers do (perhaps because albums may be intrinsically more abstract, and so may need a stronger marketing image to be associated with).

The criterion is intended to capture the case where there are quite different dominant images associated with the album, either in different major territorial blocs (eg USA vs Europe) or different times; and to try to distinguish those from the mere chaff of special editions, picture discs and the like. So it's intended to explain why an image like this one should be deleted, while other alt covers might be kept. Jheald (talk) 18:38, 1 February 2013 (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:Tohoshinki - Android (CD+DVD).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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8 due to File:Android (TVXQ song) album cover.png. Stefan2 (talk) 12:45, 24 January 2013 (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:Tohoshinki - Catch Me (CD+DVD).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 Chick Bowen (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:14, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8 because of File:Catch Me If You Wanna.jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 12:48, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Passes WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8 as stated on Template:Infobox album, "An alternate cover that is significantly different from the original and is widely distributed and/or replaces the original has generally been held to pass this criterion.", that can be applied to singles. Aspects (talk) 07:11, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Per #File:Still Cover.jpg. — ξ ^xplicit 01:57, 1 February 2013 (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:Mytown.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 13:04, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: A promotional image of the band is not needed for an album article. Aspects (talk) 07:13, 29 January 2013 (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:Mytown-band-logo.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 13:05, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete A band's logo is not needed for an album article. Aspects (talk) 07:13, 29 January 2013 (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:RoyalRobertson.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3a, WP:NFCC#8 and WP:NFCC#10b (see File:Sufjanstevensageofadz.jpg). Stefan2 (talk) 13:06, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think omission of the image would be to the detriment of understanding of readers for that article, but I can't otherwise argue with this. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 13:51, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom. Jujutacular (talk) 16:05, 31 January 2013 (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:Doushite Kimi wo Suki ni Natte Shimattandarou cd+dvd.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8 due to File:Doushite Kimi wo Suki ni Natte Shimattandarou cd.jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 13:17, 24 January 2013 (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:Doushite Kimi Wo Suki Ni Natte Shimattandarou?.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 13:17, 24 January 2013 (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:Tohoshinki Jumon-Mirotic (CD+DVD).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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8 due to File:TVXQ Mirotic (Japan).jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 13:19, 24 January 2013 (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:Tohoshinki - Stand By U (CD+DVD).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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8 due to File:Tohoshinki - Stand By U.jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 13:20, 24 January 2013 (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:Upin Ipin 3.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#10c. In one of the articles, it also violates WP:NFLISTS. Stefan2 (talk) 14:35, 24 January 2013 (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:Upin Ipin 4.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#10c. In one of the articles, it also violates WP:NFLISTS. Stefan2 (talk) 14:35, 24 January 2013 (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:Just A Ride Aus CD.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File is almost identical to File:Just A Ride UK.jpg and fails the non-free policy Werieth (talk) 19:23, 24 January 2013 (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:DB table.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 DeltaQuad (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:02, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan image with know encyclopedic value. See [1] for uploaders response: " I used it in one of my articles. But somebody deleted it from the article, claimimg it can be easily calculated by logarithms. I think a wikitable form may be more useful." -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 19:23, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. I created this jpg file on 17 September 2009 and I used it in an article. But it was deleted with the rationale "no need to tables in this age of calculators". But now I see that another jpg table with exactly the same content had been added to the article Decibel on 31 May 2011 and it seems nobody had opposed to it (later on it was converted to wikitable) . Funny isn't it. I agree that the table is orphan at the moment. But it can be used in other WP's. So instead of deleting it, transferring to Commons repository can be discussed. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 10:54, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I understand where you are coming from, but this image would be much better off as a wikitable and Commons is not a dumping ground for images: Commons:Commons:What Commons is not. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 22:54, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What is it? Chick Bowen 21:01, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to be a table comparing ratio to dB. I still do not see a use for this content in this format. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 23:06, 16 February 2013 (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:Moses Tony Smith.png

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A photo of a sculpture has two copyrights: the copyright of the sculptor and the copyright of the photographer. The sculptor part is irreplaceable but the photographer part is replaceable. The source is this which is listed as CC-BY-NC-ND 2.0, but it can be replaced by an image which doesn't infringe on the photographer's copyright. See {{photo of art}}. Stefan2 (talk) 21:43, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

delete. Unused, so fails NFCC #7. Thryduulf (talk) 13:12, 31 January 2013 (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:A scene from the movie "Delovak Athara".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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Seemingly random scene which doesn't really help with the understanding of the article. Fails WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 21:46, 24 January 2013 (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:A scene from the movie "Ran Salu".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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Seemingly random scene. Doesn't really help with the understanding of the article. Fails WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 21:48, 24 January 2013 (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:A scene from the film "Gamperaliya".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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Seemingly random scene. Doesn't help with the understanding of the article. Fails WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 21:50, 24 January 2013 (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:Album tubebarvl2013.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article already has a different cover: File:Album tubebar.jpg. This additional one fails both WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 21:52, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is to show the new 2013 cover below as an alternative, this is used in other articles so not sure what the problem is? There is no reason to delete it. It does not fail either wiki rule as it is vital to see what the alterntive cover is about. Stop playing "wiki police" and go bother some other articles. Tyros1972 (talk) 22:31, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As long as there is no critical discussion about the art on alternative cover, it does indeed fail both WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8. There is no policy permitting galleries of non-free covers in music articles. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:38, 24 January 2013 (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:Album tubebarv22013.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8 due to File:Album taverntour2.jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 21:55, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is to show the new 2013 cover below as an alternative, this is used in other articles so not sure what the problem is? There is no reason to delete it. It does not fail either wiki rule as it is vital to see what the alterntive cover is about. Stop playing "wiki police" and go bother some other articles. Tyros1972 (talk) 22:31, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As long as there is no critical discussion about the art on alternative cover, it does indeed fail both WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8. There is no policy permitting galleries of non-free covers in music articles. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:38, 24 January 2013 (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:JoshLanglois.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 as F4 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of a non-notable minor with no conceivable encyclopedic use. --Bongwarrior (talk) 21:57, 24 January 2013 (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:Equation 1.png

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image is replaced easily by $FS={\frac {allowable\ (test)\ value}{required\ (design)\ value}}$ . I replaced it in the article Geonets already so the image is now orphaned. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 22:15, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Consider using

FS={\frac {\mathrm {allowable\;(test)\;value} }{\mathrm {required\;(design)\;value} }}

instead. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:17, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, thanks. I'm still slowly learning these equations. If you don't mind me picking your brain, the "\mathrm" keeps it from being italics and the "\;" is the space instead of "\ ", yes? -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 23:14, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

\mathrm switches off italics. I believe that "\;" and "\ " do exactly the same thing, but I've never seen "\ " before. There is also "\," for half a space and "\!" for half a backspace. --Stefan2 (talk) 23:32, 24 January 2013 (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:Equation2b.png

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image is replaced easily by $FS={\frac {q_{allow}}{q_{reqd}}}$ . I replaced it in the article Geonets already so the image is now orphaned. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 22:15, 24 January 2013 (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:Equation4new.png

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image is replaced by $q=kiA$

$q=ki(W\times t)$

$q=(kt)iW$

$kt={\mathit {\Theta }}={\frac {q}{iW}}$ which I have already put in the article Geonets and it is now orphaned. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 22:16, 24 January 2013 (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:Switched On Bach 1968 alternative cover.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8: the article already has a different cover image. Stefan2 (talk) 22:31, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Cannot see the problem here, the reason why the album has two different covers is discussed in Switched-On Bach#Re-releases. Please avoid adding this template like confetti without reading the article first.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 08:12, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The text in that section shows that the differences are replaceable by text. You don't need an extra image just to know that a person is sitting instead of standing. --Stefan2 (talk) 12:52, 25 January 2013 (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:Paris-Ooh-La-La-alternative-cover.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 Chick Bowen (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:14, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8: the article already has a different cover image. Stefan2 (talk) 22:31, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Passes WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8 as stated on Template:Infobox album, "An alternate cover that is significantly different from the original and is widely distributed and/or replaces the original has generally been held to pass this criterion.", that can be applied to singles. Aspects (talk) 07:19, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Per #File:Still Cover.jpg. — ξ ^xplicit 01:57, 1 February 2013 (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:Cher - I Found Someone (alternative cover).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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8: the article already has a different cover image. Stefan2 (talk) 22:32, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Howdy. It appears that when I uploaded the image I used rationale I used wasn't ideal. According to the image's caption in the article it is used in it is a sheet music cover and not an album cover. That being said, I'm cool with it being deleted.--Rockfang (talk) 01:42, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Since sheet music is not typically the primary channel through which a work of popular music is distributed to its audience (99% of those who listen to a song wouldn't even be able to read the sheet music), a sheet music cover won't have the unique "identificational" function crucial to the usual fair-use justifications for cover art. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:15, 29 January 2013 (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:Fiestar wicked alternative cover vista 2012.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8: the article already has a different cover image. Stefan2 (talk) 22:32, 24 January 2013 (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:Fiestar sweet love alternative cover 2012.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8: the article already has a different cover image. Stefan2 (talk) 22:33, 24 January 2013 (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:Mr. Lover Lover – The Best of Shaggy alternative cover.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8: the article already has a different cover image. Stefan2 (talk) 22:34, 24 January 2013 (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:Shaggymrloverloverus.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: keep. Chick Bowen 21:09, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8: the article already has a different cover image. Stefan2 (talk) 22:34, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Passes WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8 as stated on Template:Infobox album, "An alternate cover that is significantly different from the original and is widely distributed and/or replaces the original has generally been held to pass this criterion." Aspects (talk) 07:21, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Per #File:Still Cover.jpg. — ξ ^xplicit 01:57, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Per my comment under #File:Still Cover. Where the dominant image associated with an album is different for a major territory (here the U.S.A), that is the circumstance where an alt cover has generally been considered to pass NFCC #8, per the logic of NFCI #1. This is a case to be distinguished from picture discs, CD+DVD releases and other subsidiary images that might be associated with the album in the same territory. Jheald (talk) 18:52, 1 February 2013 (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:Don't Look Away alternative album cover by Kate Voegele.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8: the article already has a different cover image. Stefan2 (talk) 22:34, 24 January 2013 (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:Kate Voegele - Don't Look Away (alt).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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8: the article already has a different cover image. Stefan2 (talk) 22:35, 24 January 2013 (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:Smart-Ass John.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Invalid FUR--this is not used in a critical fashion, but as decoration —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:16, 24 January 2013 (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:VertigoX.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Invalid FUR--this is not used to significantly enhance understanding. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:17, 24 January 2013 (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:Adolf Hitler and Unity Mitford 2.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 as F5 by Chick Bowen (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 23:00, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The woman in the photo is not Unity Mitford. Compare all the other photos of her. (And this photo is not found at the given external source.) I brought this up on the Talk page, and got agreement from the one responder. No response on the talk page for the image itself. (It's been 8 days, in both cases.) I removed the image from the Unity Mitford page, the only place it was used. Thanks. Ale And Quail (talk) 23:38, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tentative keep – I'm not convinced it isn't her, visually, and it's identified as being her by Channel4.com [2] as well as Der Spiegel [3]. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:58, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for taking a look, and for finding those. I'm more uncertain, now. To my eyes, it looks completely unlike her, and the rest of those Spiegel photos strengthen that impression. But of course photos can come out that way. It could be a mistake, just passed on by those sources, but they do raise the chances of its credibility, to me. Puzzled. Ale And Quail (talk) 21:31, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Since it's not currently being used, and since there's already another picture of her and Hitler in the article, I'm deleting it for now as WP:CSD#F5, unused unfree (that is, as a technical matter I'm not closing this nomination as delete, although the bot will shortly close it as deleted by CSD). If it is needed, it can be undeleted (or, better, reuploaded with a link to an active or permanently archived source), but there are a lot of unfree images in that article and I think some choices need to be made anyway. Chick Bowen 21:19, 5 February 2013 (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.