Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2006 October 2

< October 1	October 3 >

October 2

Olympos turkey.jpg obsolated by OlymposRomanBath.jpg. Moreover, the old file is under suspicious license. ---Botev
Image:1919-Trotsky Lenin Kamenev-Party-Congress.gif: OR, incorrect license, OB by Image:1919-Trotsky Lenin Kamenev-Party-Congress.jpg Lupo 09:36, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Zinoviev 1979 uni Munich.jpg: CV, no source. Lupo 09:57, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Prabhupada12.jpg suspicious license--Qwarc 13:33, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A readily available photograph (in ISKCON temples and on the internet) taken by a member of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness for the purpose of mass distribution. I see it's use on the ISKCON article to be acceptable for the point of illustrating the person/people and movement in question? If further clarification is required please ask me and I will provide. Ys, GourangaUK 17:45, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Image misses source and copyright status information (could have used {{no source}}. --Abu Badali 21:48, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep, a source would be nice... I don't think a deletion is needed, just a correction of license... if there are no free alternatives, write up a fair use rational of it. - Deathrocker 23:01, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This image has no source and insufficient fair use rational -Nv8200p talk 16:42, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (2) I have now added a fair-use rationale to the image page and reduced the size of the image (low resolution). It is near impossible to source this type of photograph as it was not taken for financial purposes with standard copyright concerns. GourangaUK 08:31, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: How do you know for sure that this image "was not taken for financial purposes " if you don't know the source? --Abu Badali 11:17, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - It is common practice amongst members of ISKCON to take pictures of spiritual masters (gurus) in order to freely distribute the images to other people. How to trace the devotee from the early 1970's who took the photo? Given the missionary nature of the movement I see it as fair-use to include a low-res version of a quality image of this sort in the article. GourangaUK 14:56, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:PrabhupadaDancing.jpg suspicious license --Qwarc 13:33, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A readily available photograph (in ISKCON temples and on the internet) taken by a member of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness for the purpose of mass distribution. I see it's use on the ISKCON article to be acceptable for the point of illustrating the person/people and movement in question? If further clarification is required please ask me and I will provide. Ys, GourangaUK 17:45, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep, a source would be nice... I don't think a deletion is needed, just a correction of license... if there are no free alternatives, write up a fair use rational of it. - Deathrocker 23:01, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This image has no source and insufficient fair use rational -Nv8200p talk 16:42, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (2) I have now added a fair-use rationale to the image page and reduced the size of the image (low resolution). It is near impossible to source this type of photograph as it was not taken for financial purposes with standard copyright concerns. GourangaUK 08:31, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: How do you know for sure that this image "was not taken for financial purposes " if you don't know the source? --Abu Badali 11:17, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - It is common practice amongst members of ISKCON to take pictures of spiritual masters (gurus) in order to freely distribute the images to other people. How to trace the devotee from the early 1970's who took the photo? Given the missionary nature of the movement I see it as fair-use to include a low-res version of a quality image of this sort in the article. GourangaUK 14:56, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Violates WP:IUP for lacking a source and WP:FUC #8. howch e ng {chat} 16:30, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:MileAus.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Diffused666 (notify | contribs). Not ensyclopedic, orphanded- Sherool (talk) 15:33, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:O Beco.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Borisbaker (notify | contribs). OR, UE, AB Nv8200p talk 17:11, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Jonathan Lovingly Taketh His Leave of David by Julius Schnorr von Carolsfeld.png (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Queerudite (notify | contribs). Duplicate of Image:Jonathan Lovingly Taketh His Leave of David by Julius Schnorr von Carolsfeld.jpg- Esprit15d 19:20, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Porsche 997 Turbo.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Fuzzyworcester (notify | contribs). OB by Image:997 turbo gelb 04.jpg ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 20:24, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:2006 Porsche 911 GT3.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Fuzzyworcester (notify | contribs). OB by Image:2006 SAG - Porsche GT3 -04.JPG.JPG ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 20:28, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:2007 Porsche 911 GT3 RS.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Porsche997SBS (notify | contribs). OB by Image:Porsche 911 GT3 RS 997.JPG- ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 20:32, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Tinyspkricon.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Polaris999 (notify | contribs). OB, OR, wrong license- YellowDot 20:39, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:2005-Porsche-911-Carrera-S.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by ALepik (notify | contribs). OB by Image:P997 carrera s frontview.jpg ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 20:44, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Turkflag.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Fikricoban (notify | contribs). OR, AB, wrong license, horrible quality, wrong aspect ratio- YellowDot 20:47, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:WeirdalWiki.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Sceptre (notify | contribs). OR, UE, unclear copyright status, bad quality- YellowDot 20:58, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:996 - GT3 RS.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Flash-Gordon (notify | contribs). OB by Image:Porsche 996 GT3 RS.jpg ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 21:00, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Wiki letter w proposed.png (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Soapergem (notify | contribs). OR, unlinked, AB, wrong license- YellowDot 21:02, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Benito Carbone.jpg (talk | delete)

Keep This image should not be deleted. It is a promotional portrait photo just as all other A-League player profile photos are. This photo ws taken from the Sydney FC Official Website. Rossoneri3 09:34, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Delete (of course). The template used clearly states "This tag should only be used for images of a person, product, or event that is known to have come from a press kit or similar source", and there is no press kit on Sydney FC site, or at least the uploader did not pointed at it.--Panarjedde 10:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Indeed, images from this site should not be considered promotional. According to its Legal notice, "...no material on this website may be altered, reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted without the prior written consent of Football Federation Australia.". --Abu Badali 12:11, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: These are the photos used by all the media in Australia as the player profile photo for A-League players. Wikipedia can use them as well.

Do you think that copyright infringment by other people in Australia is a good reason for copyright infringment on Wikipedia? Even if the copyright holder has no intention to sue copyright infringments, the upload of these images is against WP policy. Furthermore, the previous "vote" belongs to Rossoneri3, who already voted on this issue, so I am deleting it.--Panarjedde 07:33, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Labinot Haliti.jpg (talk | delete)

Keep This image should not be deleted. It is a promotional portrait photo just as all other A-League player profile photos are. This photo ws taken from the Newcastle United Jets FC Official Website. Rossoneri3 09:34, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Delete (of course). The template used clearly states "This tag should only be used for images of a person, product, or event that is known to have come from a press kit or similar source", and there is no press kit on Newcastlre United site, or at least the uploader did not pointed at it.--Panarjedde 10:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Indeed, images from this site should not be considered promotional. According to its Legal notice, "...no material on this website may be altered, reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted without the prior written consent of Football Federation Australia.". --Abu Badali 12:11, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: These are the photos used by all the media in Australia as the player profile photo for A-League players. Wikipedia can use them as well.

Do you think that copyright infringment by other people in Australia is a good reason for copyright infringment on Wikipedia? Even if the copyright holder has no intention to sue copyright infringments, the upload of these images is against WP policy. Furthermore, the previous "vote" belongs to Rossoneri3, who already voted on this issue, so I am deleting it.--Panarjedde 07:33, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Melvssyd.jpg (talk | delete)
Image:DeNapoli Italia.jpg (talk | delete)
Image:CrespoHernanInter.jpg (talk | delete)
Image:ALBERTOSiItaly.jpg (talk | delete)
Image:JuventusChampionsEuro.gif (talk | delete)
Image:CamoItaliaPromo.jpg (talk | delete)
Image:AlbertiniPromo.jpg (talk | delete)
Image:DuffNewcastle.jpg (talk | delete)

CV. Claimed to be promotional photos, which is not. Panarjedde 21:04, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:996 - GT3 7.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Flash-Gordon (notify | contribs). OB by Image:Porsche GT 3 r blue.jpg ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 21:09, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:WkBoxPics1.jpg (talk | delete)
Image:WkBoxPics2.jpg (talk | delete)
Image:WkBoxPics4.jpg (talk | delete)
Image:WkBoxPics6.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Chuck Marean (notify | contribs). OR, UE, bad quality- YellowDot 21:10, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep them all. I'm not using them; somebody might want to. If they're such bad quality, how do you do better? I used a cell phone. How else would you do a screen shot?--Chuck Marean 23:33, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and insofar as, IMHO, none of the images will ever serve any useful purpose w/r/to the project. Joe 20:33, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There are orphans. The quality looks pretty bad too. -Nv8200p talk 16:22, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Porsche 993 Carrera 4S.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by German Autofreak (notify | contribs). OB by Image:993 Carrera.jpg ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 21:21, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Porsche 911 turbo-S.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Marc Lacoste (notify | contribs). OB by Image:Porsche 964 Turbo.jpg ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 21:27, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I understand a free licensed alternative is available, but the photo is of lesser quality. In Wikipedia:Publicity_photos is given "If it is possible to replace the publicity image with a new, free, image of similar value to the reader then the free image must be used in preference to the restricted and copyrighted publicity photograph." In my view, the value for the reader is diminished by the alternative, and therefore the original could be still used. --Marc Lacoste 21:54, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Most free licensed images are not going to be of better quality then a professional promo pic. This free licensed image is of sufficient quality for the article. -Nv8200p talk 16:48, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Porsche914 MathiasRufer.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Palexandridis (notify | contribs). NC, OB by Image:MHV VW-Porsche 914-6.jpg ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 21:39, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:PippoJuve.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Deathrocker (notify | contribs). Tagged as promotional, but url given as source is not from a source for promotional material (it's just a website that happens to use the image (sensazioniforti.com)). I tried to remove it and mark as {{no source}}, but it got promptly reverted by the uploader.- Abu Badali 21:42, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, the promotional shot has a source provided[1]... Abu Badali attempted to blank it and placed an incorrect tag on its page. [2] - Deathrocker 21:58, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: it is Deathrocker who has the burden to prove this image is promotional.--Panarjedde 22:03, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not a legitimate promotional source. -Nv8200p talk 16:53, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Wednesday-13-2005.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Deathrocker (notify | contribs). Tagged as promotional, but url given as source is not from a source for promotional material (it's just a website that happens to use the image (musikbase.de)). I tried to remove it and mark as {{no source}}, but it got promptly reverted by the uploader.- Abu Badali 21:42, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, the promotional shot has a source provided[3]... Abu Badali attempted to blank it and placed an incorrect tag on its page. [4] - Deathrocker 22:05, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: it is Deathrocker who has the burden to prove this image is promotional. --Panarjedde 22:13, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not a legitimate promotional source. -Nv8200p talk 16:55, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:JuninhoPaulistaMedal.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Deathrocker (notify | contribs). Tagged as promotional, but url given as source is not from a source for promotional material (it's just a website that happens to use the image (turksportal.net). I tried to remove it and mark as {{no source}}, but it got promptly reverted by the uploader.- Abu Badali 21:42, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, the promotional shot has a source provided[5]... Abu Badali attempted to blank it and placed an incorrect tag on its page. [6] - Deathrocker 22:05, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: it is Deathrocker who has the burden to prove this image is promotional. --Panarjedde 22:13, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not a legitimate promotional source. -Nv8200p talk 16:57, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:LA Guns 89.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Deathrocker (notify | contribs). Tagged as promotional, but url given as source is not from a source for promotional material (it's just a website that happens to use the image (retrojunk.com)). I tried to remove it and mark as {{no source}}, but it got promptly reverted by the uploader.- Abu Badali 21:42, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, the promotional shot has a source provided[7]... Abu Badali attempted to blank it and placed an incorrect tag on its page. [8] - Deathrocker 22:05, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: it is Deathrocker who has the burden to prove this image is promotional. --Panarjedde 22:13, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not a legitimate promotional source. -Nv8200p talk 17:01, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:ValorKandCD.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Deathrocker (notify | contribs). Tagged as promotional, but url given as source is not from a source for promotional material (it's just a website that happens to use the image (rockdetector.com)). I tried to remove it and mark as {{no source}}, but it got promptly reverted by the uploader.- Abu Badali 21:42, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, the promotional shot has a source provided[9]... Abu Badali attempted to blank it and placed an incorrect tag on its page. [10] - Deathrocker 22:10, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: it is Deathrocker who has the burden to prove this image is promotional. --Panarjedde 22:13, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not a legitimate promotional source. -Nv8200p talk 17:01, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Dinah45G.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Deathrocker (notify | contribs). Tagged as promotional, but url given as source is not from a source for promotional material (it's just a website that happens to use the image (myspace-596.vo.llnwd.net)). I tried to remove it and mark as {{no source}}, but it got promptly reverted by the uploader.- Abu Badali 21:42, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, the promotional shot has a source from the bands MySpace, as stated on its page.[11] Abu Badali attempted to blank it.[12] - Deathrocker 21:54, 2 October 2006 (UTC) Delete: it is Deathrocker who has the burden to prove this image is promotional. --Panarjedde 22:13, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Deathrocker. If you could, use provide a link to the page using the image, instead of a direct link to the jpg file. This way, others could easly verify the image use licensing terms, validating the {{promo}} tag. Let me know if you need any help. Also, you may want to fix the diffs you are providing, as they are allways a combination of two editions. --Abu Badali 22:05, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The first diff shows where the source was added, the second shows where you blanked it and placed an incorrect tag claiming "no source". It is supposed to be that way. - Deathrocker 22:08, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is no policy stating that you cannot source directly to the image itself.. infact that is what is requested, a source for the IMAGE. Anyway.. the bands official myspace is there, and then "View My: Pics" to find the promo image uploaded. - Deathrocker 22:30, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By source we should understand "information on author and copyright status". A direct link to the image doesn't give us that. About the Myspace page, I'm not sure but I believe it can't be used because it requires registration (I, for one, could not follow the "View My: Pics link"). Can someone verify this? --Abu Badali 00:14, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MySpace is not a valid source. Neither is Geocities, Tripod, Google, etc. I suggest you replace this image with the image from Dark Moon Entertainment. It shows the whole band and is about as good a source as you can get for a promo shot as it is their management company. -Nv8200p talk 16:18, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, that one is also not promotional. According to the text on the homepage: " information on this site shall not be used in whole or part without written permission by the owner". :( --Abu Badali 11:17, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Porsche 804.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Marc Lacoste (notify | contribs). OB by Image:Porsche 804 F1.jpg ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 21:56, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I understand a free licensed alternative is available, but the photo is of lesser quality. In Wikipedia:Publicity_photos is given "If it is possible to replace the publicity image with a new, free, image of similar value to the reader then the free image must be used in preference to the restricted and copyrighted publicity photograph." In my view, the value for the reader is diminished by the alternative, and therefore the original could be still used. --Marc Lacoste 13:21, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Fermata.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Ianweller (notify | contribs). OR, LQ, OB, replaced by Fermata.svg. Super Rad! 22:05, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Francois vase.jpg (relisted from Sep 22, uploader not notified) - CV, Image definetly not older than 100 years. Unfree. Kenwilliams 13:57, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Bluedragonsmall.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by A176 (notify | contribs). OR, OB by Image:Bluedragonsmall.png. — Wwagner 23:55, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]