Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2008 February 12

< February 11	February 13 >

February 12

Image:HadCRUT3-temp-record-alternate.svg

Image:HadCRUT3-temp-record-alternate.svg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Leland McInnes (notify | contribs).

Auto listing incomplete IfD, image is not orphaned. BJBot (talk) 00:10, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Mr bellshaw.jpg

Image:Mr bellshaw.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Gavin Scott (notify | contribs).

non notable individual, being used in article that reads like advert. 82.26.104.87 (talk) 03:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
keep he is notable in the local community, adds substance to the article. Gavin Scott (talk) 11:24, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:HadCRUT3-temp-record-w-errors.svg

Image:HadCRUT3-temp-record-w-errors.svg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Leland McInnes (notify | contribs).

Auto listing incomplete IfD, image is not orphaned. BJBot (talk) 00:10, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Molly_Pitcher.jpg

Image:Molly_Pitcher.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Wikidavejames (notify | contribs).

Obsolete by larger Image:Molly Pitcher engraving.jpg (mostly the same image on Commons) howcheng {chat} 01:09, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:N518497704 90826 5993.jpg

Image:N518497704 90826 5993.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Catfox123 (notify | contribs).

Image was uploaded only to vandalize Cat-fox, serves no other purpose. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 02:05, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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. No consensus to delete. -Nv8200p talk 02:29, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:LanguagesGreece.PNG

Image:LanguagesGreece.PNG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Telex (notify | contribs).

This picture is supported by no references, is ugly/homemade and is being misused for propagandistic purposes. I don't deny that a map of the linguistic minority areas of Greece would be useful, however I do think that it should be backed by reliable references and correspond with reality. Dolavon (talk) 02:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, this reflects the literature pretty well and can easily be sourced. Reference would be Trudgill (I forget the exact article right now, but I used to have it somewhere.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:26, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, User:Polibiush added this link to the image page:[1]. I don't know how reliable that site is, but by looking at that site and the current image, the current image appears to be off. _{El Greco}^(talk) 02:31, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, Ethnologue is a very reliable source. Polibiush (talk) 17:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. Image is interesting but better make one with minorities. In this one Pomaks are not shown and I think wants to underline the word "Turkish". In Greece there is a muslin minority. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:24, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: "Muslim" isn't a language. This is supposed to be a linguistic map. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:16, 17 February 2008 (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.

Image:Cavepaintingcesarean.jpg

Image:Cavepaintingcesarean.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Awaz89 (notify | contribs).

Original image edited to add a fake "Caesarean section", and is being used to vandalise the Caesarean section article. The original untouched image is linked to on the image page. Ciotog (talk) 03:27, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:AssCrack.jpg

Image:AssCrack.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by BJ1833 (notify | contribs).

CV, LQ, UE, AU - GFDL asserted with no other information given. Low quality image of a man's partially exposed buttocks that may qualify as an attack image. Image is user's only contribution. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 08:57, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not encyclopedic. Compwhiz II^(Talk)_(Contribs) 14:40, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:--.jpg

Image:--.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Rrjs819 (notify | contribs).

Not used, not ensyclopedic. Sherool (talk) 17:00, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Norodom_Sihamoni.jpg

Image:Norodom_Sihamoni.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Nat (notify | contribs).

permission does not extend to derivative works, so this image is nonfree. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:04, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Commons showing through. -Nv8200p talk 00:45, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:031.jpg

Image:031.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Jc088 (notify | contribs).

Not used, none of the 3 different images under this name seem to have any source info excpt the copyright watermark on the current one. Sherool (talk) 17:07, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not used, looks like something out of a weightloss/get fit commercial. Sherool (talk) 17:19, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:025A_Crui_0307383318fpo_r1_NEW.jpeg

Image:025A_Crui_0307383318fpo_r1_NEW.jpeg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by FittnessFan (notify | contribs).

Not used, looks like something out of a weightloss/get fit commercial. Sherool (talk) 17:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:08-24-07_1717.jpg

Image:08-24-07_1717.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Pearlz_j (notify | contribs).

Not used, probably not ensyclopedic seeing as the article it used to be in has been speedy deleted a couple of times as non-notable bio and spam. Sherool (talk) 17:22, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:1_232986740l.jpg

Image:1_232986740l.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Angeljocelyn (notify | contribs).

Not used, probably not PD self as the uploader himself say it's taken from some blog who most likey doesn't own the copyright either. Sherool (talk) 17:33, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:01022008(014).jpg

Image:01022008(014).jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Fyz4127 (notify | contribs).

Not used, not ensyclopedic. Sherool (talk) 17:33, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:1_339795605l_(Custom).jpg

Image:1_339795605l_(Custom).jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by ILovePopCorn (notify | contribs).

Not used, not ensyclopedic. Sherool (talk) 17:40, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Albinora logo.jpg

Image:Albinora logo.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Mrsaddal (notify | contribs).

Orphaned Oli Filth^(talk) 20:35, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Pol=pot.jpg

Image:Pol=pot.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Bnguyen (notify | contribs).

we already have one nonfree portrait in the infobox (one of three unneeded nonfree images of pol pot i'm nominating) Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:44, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:PolPot'75.jpg

Image:PolPot'75.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Blofeld_of_SPECTRE (notify | contribs).

we already have one nonfree portrait in the infobox (one of three unneeded nonfree images of pol pot i'm nominating) Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:44, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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: image kept -Nv8200p talk 00:41, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:PolPotdead.gif

Image:PolPotdead.gif (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Blofeld_of_SPECTRE (notify | contribs).

we already have one nonfree portrait in the infobox, and picture of dead pol pot doesn't really add to readers' understanding. (one of three unneeded nonfree images of pol pot i'm nominating) Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:45, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Yea, but it's the only picture of Pol Pot's death. The image was iconic at the time and widely distributed as proof of death. Since his death is addressed in the article, and since this is a picture of Pol Pot's death, it should be kept. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cumulus Clouds (talk • contribs) 22:58, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But does anyone dispute his death now? I don't think our readers need to see the picture to know he's dead. Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:32, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It. Are you really that squeamish? Then might I suggest you avoid the mummy exhibit next time you visit a decent museum and what ever you do, do NOT watch the Nick Berg execution video. Not even to determine if it is indeed fake. Oh, and avoid funerals at all cost. That was sarcasm by the way. My dear grandmother passed away this summer and I not only saw her dead body in person; I touched it. Geeze, leave the educational pics alone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.213.109.202 (talk) 05:02, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The picture isn't there to prove whether he's dead or not, it's there to illustrate the points made in the article. I think an important and unique picture such as this should be kept in an encyclopedia. Orpheus (talk) 09:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Of educational value, not least in the sense that they show the importance of demonstrating that a despot has been killed for the purposes of national reconciliation. This process, for instance, was practised after the Nuremberg Trials. Articles about those executed following Nurmeberg frequently include pictures of the dead subject (see, inter alia, Alfred_Rosenberg,Joachim_von_Ribbentrop and Herman_Goring). Further pictures of the the Late Pope, post mortem, appear in the article Funeral_of_Pope_John_Paul_II so we can hardly argue for a general prohibition on pictures of the dead. Swiftgrade (talk) 13:31, 27 February 2008 (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.