Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2008 June 21

Image:GimmeMore BS cover.jpg

Image:GimmeMore BS cover.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Jarajet89 (notify | contribs).

Fake, fanmade cover. Of no encyclopedic significance. Save-Me-Oprah ^(talk) 07:02, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:LisaKirk.jpg

Image:LisaKirk.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by SFTVLGUY2 (notify | contribs).

Non-free album covers can only be used to illustrate the audio recording in question. Here it is being used solely to identify the singer. Papa November (talk) 07:17, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Newbug-smaller.jpg

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

Not GFDL-presumed. Author clearly states at User_talk:Tannin#Image:Brolga.jpg he does not want his work licensed GFDL. -Nard 14:29, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An attempt at publishing a research paper. The uploader's sole contribution. Orphan. TwoMightyGods^Persuasion_Necessity 17:22, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Alexinewarms.jpg

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

User:Tekanu was a sole purpose account that launched a "Tekanu microstate" nonsense/spam campaign. Their main article was speedy deleted as nonsense. This is a mop-up of the images left behind. TwoMightyGods^Persuasion_Necessity 18:45, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Yinyang2.jpg

Image:Yinyang2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Tekanu (notify | contribs).

User:Tekanu was a sole purpose account that launched a "Tekanu microstate" nonsense/spam campaign. Their main article was speedy deleted as nonsense. This is a mop-up of the images left behind. TwoMightyGods^Persuasion_Necessity 18:47, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Maxarms copy4.jpg

Image:Maxarms copy4.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Tekanu (notify | contribs).

User:Tekanu was a sole purpose account that launched a "Tekanu microstate" nonsense/spam campaign. Their main article was speedy deleted as nonsense. This is a mop-up of the images left behind as part of that campaign. TwoMightyGods^Persuasion_Necessity 18:48, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Jacobarmsblue.jpg

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

User:Tekanu was a sole purpose account that launched a "Tekanu microstate" nonsense/spam campaign. Their main article was speedy deleted as nonsense. This is a mop-up of the images left behind as part of that campaign. TwoMightyGods^Persuasion_Necessity 18:49, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Talossaarms2.jpg

Image:Talossaarms2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Tekanu (notify | contribs).

User:Tekanu was a sole purpose account that launched a "Tekanu microstate" nonsense/spam campaign. Their main article was speedy deleted as nonsense. This is a mop-up of the images left behind as part of that campaign. TwoMightyGods^Persuasion_Necessity 18:49, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Sagearms.jpg

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

User:Tekanu was a sole purpose account that launched a "Tekanu microstate" nonsense/spam campaign. Their main article was speedy deleted as nonsense. This is a mop-up of the images left behind as part of that campaign. TwoMightyGods^Persuasion_Necessity 18:49, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Vuodelution copy.jpg

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

User:Tekanu was a sole purpose account that launched a "Tekanu microstate" nonsense/spam campaign. Their main article was speedy deleted as nonsense. This is a mop-up of the images left behind as part of that campaign. TwoMightyGods^Persuasion_Necessity 18:50, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Talossanvoice.jpg

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

User:Tekanu was a sole purpose account that launched a "Tekanu microstate" nonsense/spam campaign. Their main article was speedy deleted as nonsense. This is a mop-up of the images left behind as part of that campaign. TwoMightyGods^Persuasion_Necessity 18:50, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Yinyang1.jpg

Image:Yinyang1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Tekanu (notify | contribs).

User:Tekanu was a sole purpose account that launched a "Tekanu microstate" nonsense/spam campaign. Their main article was speedy deleted as nonsense. This is a mop-up of the images left behind as part of that campaign. TwoMightyGods^Persuasion_Necessity 18:50, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Vuodefinal.jpg

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

User:Tekanu was a sole purpose account that launched a "Tekanu microstate" nonsense/spam campaign. Their main article was speedy deleted as nonsense. This is a mop-up of the images left behind as part of that campaign. TwoMightyGods^Persuasion_Necessity 18:50, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Vuodefinal copy.jpg

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

User:Tekanu was a sole purpose account that launched a "Tekanu microstate" nonsense/spam campaign. Their main article was speedy deleted as nonsense. This is a mop-up of the images left behind as part of that campaign. TwoMightyGods^Persuasion_Necessity 18:51, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Lrttag copy.jpg

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

User:Tekanu was a sole purpose account that launched a "Tekanu microstate" nonsense/spam campaign. Their main article was speedy deleted as nonsense. This is a mop-up of the images left behind as part of that campaign. TwoMightyGods^Persuasion_Necessity 18:51, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Armssmallalexi.gif

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

User:Tekanu was a sole purpose account that launched a "Tekanu microstate" nonsense/spam campaign. Their main article was speedy deleted as nonsense. This is a mop-up of the images left behind as part of that campaign. TwoMightyGods^Persuasion_Necessity 18:51, 21 June 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: delete the two screenshots. Fair use images in infoboxes are merely decorative. Cited commentary about the image needs to exist in the article and the image placed in context with that commentary in order to justify using the image under fair use. Fair use images cannot be used as decoration. It is against the law and Wikipedia policy. There is no cited commentary about the "spare, economical set" or any other points presented that the image is necessary to illustrate. -Nv8200p talk 01:52, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Doctor Who Midnight.jpg

Image:Doctor Who Midnight.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Blaine Coughlan (notify | contribs).

"The Hostess grabs the posessed Sky Silvestry and drags her toward the open hatch." - in what ways can't this be portrayed by text? Does Doctor Who get an exemption from the concept of free use? Troikoalogo (talk) 21:21, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep an episode still is acceptable fair use in the episode article. Compare every The Simpsons or Futurama episode article. -Nard 21:42, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Only if it meets the criteria, which it does not: "Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic." ""Could the subject be adequately conveyed by text without using the image at all?" This image contains simply one part of a complex story and says nothing that can't be said with "x pushed y out of the airlock".--Troikoalogo (talk) 23:49, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS is not valid Fasach Nua (talk) 10:10, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Calling it CRAP (instead of STUFF) is not earning you points either. — Edokter • Talk • 12:36, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What an interesting concept, would linking to STUFF earn me points, and what does one do with all these accumulated points? Fasach Nua (talk) 07:47, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

delete - The caption conveys excatly the same information as the image itself , "The Hostess grabs the possessed Sky Silvestry and drags her toward the open hatch", fails WP:NFC#1 Fasach Nua (talk) 10:09, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, obviously, per policy and multiple precedents. When will the message finally sink in that fair use is not an invitation to just have any arbitrary one image per article regardless of what it shows, but that each image needs to be individually justified by how it supports the text? This one obviously doesn't, because like in so many other cases there's nothing in the text even worth supporting. Bad article writing = bad fair use case. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:32, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per my interpretation of NFCC8, one image that identifies the subject (that is, an image of a key moment in the episode to "represent" it). I think we've always treated "infobox screenshots" as a way to identify the episode using a key moment from it, which significantly increases the reader's understanding. That's the problem with NFCC8, it's way too open for interpretation. ViperSnake151 01:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: "we've always treated": yes, indeed, editors specialising in TV shows have persistently done that. But long-standing policy consensus here at IfD has been that that's not enough. That's why these images have been deleted routinely in dozens or hundreds of cases, unless some better claim to significance was established. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:19, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: It seems that, as always, minds are made up, and there's no use whatsoever to try to convince otherwise. Personally I think even an encyclopedia needs "decoration," but obviously, simply because I wasn't involved in the other referenced discussions, I am, by definition, wrong. And people wonder why I've given up contributing here? --Joe Sewell (talk) 00:32, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This picture illustrates the use of spare, economical set for this episode, unusual for the revived Doctor Who. Sylvestry is wearing a business suit, the hostess is in uniform. The hostess's determination and something of Sylvestry's terrifying, mesmeric gaze is portrayed in the photograph. The bright monochrome light through the open hatch hints at the pitiless wasteland outside the vehicle. It is also significant that the Doctor is not the person who takes the decisive action in this episode. Could this be portrayed in words? Perhaps, but the use of this non-free photograph here is justifiable. --Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The 12:49, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The intended purpose of this image is to "illustrate a key element of the episode." While it does, that illustration is unnecessary; the Hostess' sacrifice is important to the narrative of the article, but seeing it adds nothing that can't otherwise be (and is) described. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 18:50, 24 June 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:RSAF_Black_Knights.JPG

Image:RSAF_Black_Knights.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Dave1185 (notify | contribs).

Marked as irreplaceable because of military security. However, this is a show team, like the Blue Angels, and this picture was taken in public, far from a secure military facility. -Nard 21:40, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- delete - free image of subject already exists in article. MilborneOne (talk) 17:37, 22 June 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 per consensus in discussion. The image is encyclopedic as it is a depiction of a fictional character in a namespace article. Whether the image is fitting for the article should be hashed out on the article's talk page. -Nv8200p talk 14:51, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Dirk_Gently_illustration.jpg

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

Unencyclopedic The page it is used on described a character from a book. The image has been created by User:Chnt himself based on the description in these books, but except for that has nothing to do with the article. It is not made by the author of the books nor has it been made by the publishing house. I've asked the user about it on his talk page but he deleted my entry without replying as can be seen by the history. 129.125.101.92 (talk) 22:09, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I like it! -Nard 22:25, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not disputing the quality of the image, I'm saying the image has no place on Wikipedia (in an encyclopedia) since it is a user generated image, it has no relation with the book at all. 129.125.101.92 (talk) 09:30, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is a free image, and part of the Foundation's mission is to promote free content. It may be appropriate to transwiki it to Commons where quibbles about whether it's encyclopedic will not influence whether we retain it. As it illustrates the subject of an article, I'd be surprised if a claim that it was unencyclopedic held any water. --Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The 12:57, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(the move to commons is a good idea - I'll only talk about the Wiki article now) Don't you think it's unencyclopedic insofar it is an interpretation of someone without authority (not meant in a degrading way) about the subject? Douglas Adams describes the character in the book, and people should be free to make their own mental image of the characters. If I look at other articles about books (Nineteen Eighty-Four, Harry Potter. Stand on Zanzibar, Max Havelaar - the first few that popped in my head) I only see images of the book covers or other official material like movie screenshots - no user created images. (on a somewhat related sidenote, and not really related to this discussion, but the Dutch Harry Potter books covers don't show the faces of any characters for the same reason) 129.125.101.92 (talk) 12:30, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Any illustration is interpretive. An illustration in an encyclopedia would add to the value of an article if it helped readers (of the encyclopedia) to understand the subject. There is also a decorative function (which is quite okay in the case of free media). The question of whether an illustration affects the reader (of the novel)'s freedom to imagine the characters as they wish isn't really one we should consider on an encyclopedia. It seems to me a symptom of the excesses of fandom that such questions arise at all. --Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The 11:33, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. About the lack of response, I definitely saw your entry but since your username is an IP adress I assumed there was no point in replying to you, so I went ahead an cleaned my talk page... my bad.

on to subject. I didnt quite understand what you meant by unencyclopedic, I think you were rather vague, maybe you could be a little more specific and explain better, thanks.

about what you were saying. you claim that an image is fit for an article only if its "directly" related to the source or it's considered official; everything else is an interpretation and should have no place in that article(do I understand correctly?). I beg to differ.

1) the so called official material, like movies or book covers, are nothing but interpretations of the original work by directors or illustrators*, most times the author has little to do with them and no one takes them to be definitive as they just give a visual reference on how the author intended the characters to look like.

2) why does the image has to be directly related to the author? I get the part about me not having authority on the subject to illustrate a character, but who does? and who is to say? The actual work should speak for itself; as long as it gets the job done on illustrating how a character looks like more or less acurrately, (i think) the point of being related to the author in some way or the author of the image being entitled to do it becomes irrelevant.

I agree that if you look at articles about books you would only see images of the book covers (just like in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency and in the Harry Potter series) but this is not an article about a book its an article about a character of a book; just like the Harry Potter (character) article where there's a picture of Daniel Radcliffe, and yet people is still free to make their own mental images about the character of the book, a picture doesnt take that privilege away, it merely serves as a guideline.

.*Take the lord of the rings movies for instance, every character is the interpretation of the director (or whoever came up with the visual style, cast, costumes, etc.) based on the descriptions given in the book. They are not definitive, although accurate, since theres no way to know what exactly the characters looked like in the mind of Tolkien. To put in perspective this official label take the spanish Hitchhiker's Guide book version covers, the illustrations have little to do with the books themselves. how many times have we seen this happen on "official" books? not because something is offical means it's definitive or even accurate. Chnt (talk) 12:03, 26 June 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:Sofi_Collis.jpg

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

We don't need this pic of a little girl. Creepy. Plus per WP:NFCC#1 it's replaceable because she's still alive. -Nard 22:27, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Creepy indeed. Best deleted. TwoMightyGods^Persuasion_Necessity 22:34, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures of little girls (at least not this kind of picture) aren't intrinsically creepy, but it isn't a free image and if we want an image of her we can ask her for a free one, so it should be deleted because it doesn't pass our criteria for use of non-free content. --Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The 13:00, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No encyclopedic use; images of little girls do not enhance the reader's understanding of the Mars Exploration Rover. Sandstein 21:01, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Web header.JPG

Image:Web header.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Gateside (notify | contribs).

Clear copyvio of organisation logo. All this user's contributions are files used for the St Andrews University Conservative & Unionist Association. TwoMightyGods^Persuasion_Necessity 22:45, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Stauca.jpg

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

Clear copyvio of organisation logo. All this user's contributions are files used for the St Andrews University Conservative & Unionist Association. TwoMightyGods^Persuasion_Necessity 22:45, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Sallies2.JPG

Image:Sallies2.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Gateside (notify | contribs).

All this user's contributions are files apparently used for the St Andrews University Conservative & Unionist Association. This is a web-resolution file and so probably served the same purpose. At any rate it is orphaned with absentee uploader. TwoMightyGods^Persuasion_Necessity 22:46, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:DSCF0386.JPG

Image:DSCF0386.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Blazinian (notify | contribs).

Unencyclopedic, unused image. TwoMightyGods^Persuasion_Necessity 22:50, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Image-Second_Avenue_Subway_Line.jpg

Image:Image-Second_Avenue_Subway_Line.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Trulystand700 (notify | contribs).

Can be re-drawn, hence fails WP:NFCC#1. -Nard 23:55, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]