Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2015 May 3

< May 2	May 4 >

May 3[edit]

File:Red Foley 1943.jpg[edit]

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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant extra picture, see WP:NFCC#3. Also, no justification is given for WP:NFCC#1. It is typically possible to obtain pictures of famous Americans from this period which can be used under {{PD-US-no notice}} or {{PD-US-not renewed}}, and there is no indication that the uploader has tried looking for such pictures. Stefan2 (talk) 17:35, 3 May 2015 (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:Red Foley.jpg[edit]

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. There seems to be no copyright renewal for this image, therefore the image seems to be PD-US-not-renewed. TLSuda (talk) 12:06, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant extra picture, see WP:NFCC#3. Also, no justification is given for WP:NFCC#1. It is typically possible to obtain pictures of famous Americans from this period which can be used under {{PD-US-no notice}} or {{PD-US-not renewed}}, and there is no indication that the uploader has tried looking for such pictures. Stefan2 (talk) 17:35, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think that this is PD-US-not-renewed, from what I can find by searching the renewal databases. There are copyright renewals for Red Foley and for the television company but I cannot find any renewals for photographs of Red Foley from the period nor for the TV show this comes from. His music appears to have attracted renewal but not his image, or the TV show he starred in, from the time where renewals were required - Peripitus (Talk) 11:50, 11 May 2015 (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:EXPOSE-R2.jpeg[edit]

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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Invalid FUR: not for an article. Also violates WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 17:52, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is used in the Expose experiment article here: EXPOSE#EXPOSE-R2. It shows what the experiment looks like, with the various compartments used for the different experiments - does that not significantly improve the user's understanding of the experiment? Are there any other issues you identified with the FUR? Robert Walker (talk) 18:35, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Read the Wikipedia:Files for deletion project page, says these files will only be deleted if there is consensus or no objection. So just in case it is not clear from the previous comment - I object to deletion of this file for the reasons just given. Robert Walker (talk) 16:33, 4 May 2015 (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:IceMole test at Blood Falls.jpeg[edit]

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: Deleted - . For an image to pass NFCC#8 it has to significantly add to reader's understanding of the topic. The key word here is significantly. To keep such an image it needs to be argued that a reader of the article is, in effect, left lacking understanding by not seeing this image in its place. The longstanding consensus at image deletion discussions is that just showing something, even if someone thinks it is historic or important, is not of itself sufficient to pass this criteria. - Peripitus (Talk) 11:57, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#8 and WP:NFCC#9. Stefan2 (talk) 20:03, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain your reasoning User:Stefan2. You've just listed all my recently uploaded "non-free fair use rationale" files for deletion, or flagged them as failing the fair use rationale on their pages, but with cryptic explanations, at least for me, and I don't understand why you think they should be deleted. This one is used in IceMole#2015_test_at_Blood_Falls as well as in a draft for an article that I'm working on in my user space. I gave reasoning in the rationale for all these files which you haven't commented on. It seems to pass the fair use rationale to me, why do you think it doesn't? In what way does it not pass the guidelines you have just cited? Please elaborate, so I can understand your reasoning, and perhaps find more supporting fair use rationale for them if needed. Thanks! Robert Walker (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On this particular one, the FUR from the page is: "Photo of a historical event, first ever use of the IceMole in Antarctica. No free images available, and this image is from the press release for the event. This image was widely used to report on the event, for instance at space.com, and see google image search: [1]." Robert Walker (talk) 21:36, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Read the Wikipedia:Files for deletion project page, says these files will only be deleted if there is consensus or no objection. So just in case it is not clear from the previous comment - I object to deletion of this file for the reasons just given. Robert Walker (talk) 16:33, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Robertinventor:

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.