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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:08, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Historia_HD.svg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Kalel2007 ( | contribs).

• In the context of a similar logo already included in the article, this doesn't add much. PhilKnight (talk) 00:23, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Sorry, I really don't see your point but it dosen't matter for me... Delete it! Kalel2007 (talk) 00:31, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• I do see your point, and I agree, Delete it. — Ken g6 (talk) 18:51, 4 April 2009 (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.

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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:08, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:WonderlandOSwMS.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Fuen Fuboo ( | contribs).

• This image does not add much significant value to the understanding of the reader. See WP:NFCC in particular criterion 8, and also this is more non-free images than needed criterion 3a. NanohaA'sYuri^{Talk, My master} 04:48, 1 April 2009 (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.

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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:08, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tibetahnenerbe2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Sherurcij ( | contribs).

• I have replaced this image with a better, free image on the 1939 German expedition to Tibet page. Ken g6 (talk) 05:11, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose, while the replacement of Image:Ss tibet.gif and Image:Tibet-Expedition.jpg were warranted because they replaced the identical photograph with a larger-resolution copy from the Bundesarchiv donation of free images; THIS replacement has nothing to do with the original photo. It's possible, since Germany has released copyright on all images found from this Tibetan expedition to WMF thusfar, that we will find this image similarly granted Free licensing status - until then it should remain as an otherwise-unrecoverable piece of history as a rare photograph from that trip. Sherurcij ^{(speaker for the dead)} 20:54, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This image shows an unknown Tibetan official next to a helmet, which is reputed to have been worn at the time by Bruno Beger (a member of the expedition). Since his face is not shown, we don't know for sure. The image I replaced it with shows the face of Beger, along with a Tibetan official who the German label claims to be the Regent of Tibet. I submit that the new image more than adequately gives the same information, and much better illustrates the subject in question. The original image may be "a rare piece of history", but most copyrighted rare pieces of history do not belong in Wikipedia.

The only thing I can see in the original image that the new image does not show is the SS logo; but this is shown in another free image that was recently added to the article.

— Ken g6 (talk) 04:39, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The article is well illustrated by free images now that this non-free image is no longer necessary. howcheng {chat} 07:02, 4 April 2009 (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.

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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:08, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Psycho Chojin 03.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by TheOrgg ( | contribs).

• This image does not add much significant value to the understanding of the reader. See WP:NFCC in particular criterion 8, and also this is more non-free images than needed criterion 3a. NanohaA'sYuri^{Talk, My master} 05:16, 1 April 2009 (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.

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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:08, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Noir anime brefford.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by OgasawaraSachiko ( | contribs).

• This image does not add much significant value to the understanding of the reader. See WP:NFCC in particular criterion 8, and also this is more non-free images than needed criterion 3a. NanohaA'sYuri^{Talk, My master} 05:33, 1 April 2009 (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.

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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:03, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Europe with flags.svg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Joebloggsy ( | contribs).

• I uploaded this version by mistake, please delete. Joebloggsy (talk) 10:32, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Delete per CSD G7. — Ken g6 (talk) 19:43, 6 April 2009 (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.

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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 15:08, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Baroness Uddin.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by TheGreenEditor ( | contribs).

• Replaceable fair use - photo of a living, public figure. dave pape (talk) 16:59, 1 April 2009 (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.

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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:03, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:IbmTokyoRed.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Neep ( | contribs).

• Image is watermarked, questionable gfdl license (since on the source site it says "copyright 2004 paul@neep.net". NanohaA'sYuri^{Talk, My master} 18:42, 1 April 2009 (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.

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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:08, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Uptown1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Myahon ( | contribs).

• Low quality image that is too blurry to tell who the people are. Aspects (talk) 20:41, 1 April 2009 (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.

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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:08, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:My Disco RRR performance space.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Nick carson ( | contribs).

• Low quality image that is too blurry to tell who the people are. Aspects (talk) 20:49, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The image is actually high quality and the blurriness is intentional motion blur to caption movement at that moment. Justification for deletion is very weak. The subjects are easily identifiable given a basic knowledge of the subject matter. The amplifier and the guitar alone are individualised identifiable elements. Nick carson (talk) 04:08, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From Wikipedia:Image: "Poor quality images (too dark, blurry, etc.) or where the subject in the image is too small, hidden in clutter, ambiguous or otherwise not obvious, should not be used." Two of the people's faces are completely in black and the third person's face is blurry making the subjects of the picture not obvious to anyone, since this could be a picture of any three people. The amplifier and the guitar are not elements that need to be identifiable, the people are. Aspects (talk) 17:59, 3 April 2009 (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.

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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:08, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dali_Self-portrait.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Justin_Foote ( | contribs).

• Non-free artwork used in without any commentary in a gallery howcheng {chat} 21:52, 1 April 2009 (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.

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. Replaceable by any good artist, so fails WP:NFCC#1. – Quadell ^(talk) 20:30, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Husein Gradaščević.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by PRODUCER ( | contribs).

• We can't use a non-free drawing to illustrate a guy dead by 1834, let alone to illustrate the concept of Bosniaks. This is completely replaceable. (Maybe this image itself is free, but we need a real source (and not a file url) to establish that). Damiens.rf 22:00, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the only painting of the "guy", what is this nonsense of finding a new reason to delete every image I upload. This image is not completely replaceable you clearly haven't bothered trying to find a alternative. As for the source, "This does not apply to historical images, where sometimes only secondary sources are known, as the ultimate source of some historical images may never be known with certainty." PRODUCER (talk) 23:04, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First off, why don't you provide us with the URL to the page? It doesn't matter if it's not in English; we can find translators. howcheng {chat} 07:05, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[1] PRODUCER (talk) 15:06, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, unless for some reason his free image on the coin is not an acceptable replacement. — Ken g6 (talk) 20:55, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per my discussion above. PRODUCER (talk) 19:39, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as the copyright holder is not known. Stifle (talk) 16:55, 7 April 2009 (UTC) Keep now that the copyright holder has been specified. The image is almost certainly PD due to age. Stifle (talk) 17:11, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  The copyright holder was claimed to be Kristian Kreković (1901 - 1985). Even if we are to trust this unsourced information at face value, what makes you believe this image is "PD due to age"? You also know the guy painted the portrait before being 22 years old? --Damiens.rf 17:44, 7 April 2009 (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.

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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:08, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tourniquet - Crawl to China rex.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Azure Shrieker ( | contribs).

• No mention of this alternative cover or even the rerelease in the article. Displaying this image is adding nothing significant to the article. The use of a non-free image is not justified. J Milburn (talk) 22:20, 1 April 2009 (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.

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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:08, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Seselj.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Vanjagenije ( | contribs).

• no source PRODUCER (talk) 23:34, 1 April 2009 (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.