Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2008 January 10

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 debate was

[edit] Image: Doctor Who The Christmas Invasion.jpg

Image:Doctor Who The Christmas Invasion.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Edokter (notify | contribs).

• copyright violation, breach of NFC#1 easily described with text, and NFC#8 doesnt increase the readers understanding of the topic, bad faith upload after previous image deleted Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/2007_December_30#Image:2.0.Christmas_Invasion.jpg Fasach Nua (talk) 12:37, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Calling my upload bad faith is the last drop. You now show extreme bad faith yourself by nominating this upload, for no other reason that I uploaded it. I am not prepared to let this go on any longer and have filed a request for comments. Maenwhile, this nomination should speedily closed. — Edokter • Talk • 12:52, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

    Speedy keep - I'm sorry, but I can't see how this nomination is in good faith. Will ^(talk) 12:58, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

• Keep - image is useful - and stop putting images up for what look like very bizzare reasons. StuartDD _{contributions} 13:31, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
• Keep - Image unequivocally meets NFCC. This is nomination was made in very poor faith. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 22:01, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
• Weak keep - I can see where the nom is coming from, at least in a round about way. This may be part of an important plot sequence, but 1) it is a random frame in that sequence, and 2) the entire sequence can be adequately covered in the text of the article. From there it does fail NCF points 1 and 8. That being said, the image is identifiable from and identified with the episode, so it does server the purpose of an episode infobox image, barley. Personally, I'd prefer a clear use of the Santa hit squad since that is harder to describe and intrinsic to the theme, titling, and promo material for the episode.
  As for the nom itself... civility seems to have been left at the door. - J Greb (talk) 15:12, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

If you feel the image fails WP:NFC, how could it be used if it was kept? Fasach Nua (talk) 13:26, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

• Delete. There is no blanket allowance of one non-free image per episode/page. Every single image needs to serve an analytic purpose. This one is purely decorative. As long as the article authors find nothing more encyclopedic to say about it than "he Doctor and the Sycorax leader battle it out for the planet", I don't see a legitimate fair use purpose here. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:56, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Image deleted. There is nothing significant about this image to the article. The shot is part of a swordfight which does not need to be seen. This image fails NFCC #1 and NFCC #8. -Nv8200p talk 02:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

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.

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 debate was Deleted as copyvio. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 14:46, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Rose1970.jpg

Image:Rose1970.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by [[User talk:Dyslexicbudgie#Image:Image_name.ext listed for deletion|Dyslexicbudgie]] ([{{fullurl:User_talk:Dyslexicbudgie|action=edit&preload=Template:idw_preload&editintro=Template:idw_editintro&section=new&create=Post+a+comment}} notify] | [[Special:Contributions/Dyslexicbudgie|contribs]]).

• Copyright has no yet expired. Image was taken in 1970 and according to Australian copyright law needs to be taken prior to 1955 Crickettragic (talk) 02:28, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

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.

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 debate was Not deleted: Having a local copy of the page prevents a local upload for vandalism. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 14:48, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:PD-icon.svg

Image:PD-icon.svg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Boris23 (notify | contribs).

• Empty image. Everything's on Commons. (Normally I would speedy this, but it's protected.) Rocket000 (talk) 05:40, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
• While the actual image is on Commons, the local page is a category placeholder. It should not be deleted. — Edokter • Talk • 16:07, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Category placeholder? For what? Shouldn't there be a local copy uploaded if you have a page for it? I didn't know we should create pages in the image namespace without an image. Rocket000 (talk) 08:36, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

It is not uncommon to place Commons images, especially system icons, in local categories; that doesn't mean they have to be uploaded locally as well. — Edokter • Talk • 15:14, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

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.

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 debate was Kept: No consensus to delete. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 14:50, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Googler2-non.jpg

• This is an image of a person's license plate. This is obviously dangerous to have online for all to see. MalwareSmarts (talk) 20:52, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. It's a vanity plate, obviously designed to attract attention. Unless you have some evidence that the image is unfree, we should keep it. *** Crotalus *** 22:10, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - People leave their cars on the street where people can see their liscence plates, it's no more dangerous than having them on wiki. Million_Moments (talk) 12:17, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

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.