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⚡ 13:06, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rajesh khanna in Anand movie.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by 25 Cents FC ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).

The image is used on biographical article of deceased Indian actor Rajesh Khanna. The image fails WP:NFCC#8 as it does not demonstrate contextual significance. Also the image is black and white and comes from a scene from a colour Hindi film Anand (1971). I don't see why a modified image should be used under fair use policy. The article currently uses another non-free image File:Rajesh Khanna.jpg in it's infobox which is actor's solo closeup image and in my opinion much suitable for the purpose of infobox. Note: The other image is uploaded by me. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 11:14, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

okay , you're saying that image is black and white and comes from a scene from a colour Hindi film.Let me tell you that on 1971 era, there wasn't any colorful camera indian.Second thing image is not a screenshot of the movie.Now the second point is,despite being NFCC file used in article,another file can also be used, unless the image itself is very special by itself.So after all image doesn't violate any copyright policy specially WP:NFCC#8.We can demonstrate contextual significance by writing "Khanna and Amitabh on the sets of movie Anand" as image tittle in article.i hope this much helps.If anymore occurs,please do notify. Thank You -25 CENTS VICTORIOUS^☣ 13:29, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay! I though it was a screenshot. Anyone would think that. The source does not say anything about it. But that was just a minor point. More than one image can exist on a single article under WP:NFCC. But every image that's added under non-free rationale should have significance. Writing "Khanna and Amitabh on the sets of movie Anand" as caption does not establish significance. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 14:20, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. But if you see, the whole article is having no image at all except infobox.Bit if everything fine i would able to take his cremation ceremony pics also and may add soon on commons.Being a high importance of the article,file can be used for at least some time,unless we find from commons.I must say captioning can be done through top contributors of Indian Cinema articles just like you.I captioned what i felt,of course that isn't much important.I'm pretty sure you can caption file very well.Eventually what about deletion tag? Thank You -25 CENTS VICTORIOUS^☣ 15:40, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Obvious delete, not the object of sourced analytic discussion. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:53, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Based on what? Initially the discussion was whether to keep file or not,because can't put two non-free files in a same article.But for now I think,issue is solved.Please check article.Thank You. -25 CENTS VICTORIOUS^☣

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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 13:06, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Khata to jab ho ke.ogg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by 25 Cents FC ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).

This sound file of a Hindi song used in the article Dil Ka Kya Kasoor fails WP:NFCC#8 as it has no contextual significance. (Actually, no significance at all.) The file also has a dubious public domain license along with fair use rationale. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 11:33, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what is your point exactly.I've gone through WP:NFCC#8 again and again. dubious public domain license was tagged because of orphaned matter.It was done a long ago.Thank you -25 CENTS VICTORIOUS^☣ 13:40, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The file had both non-free rationale and Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License saying that you are the copyright holder of the song. I don't think that is true. The copyright holder of the song would be either of singer/recording company/film's producers. Hence i called it dubious. In case you are the copyright holder of the song you need to establish that. Back to NFCC#8; non-free content is allowed only if it has any significance. This song, according to me, is not significant. If you think it is, you need to establish it's significance. For example if it has won any awards for the singer, musician, lyricist, etc. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 13:58, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, i do know what licence to put,if you're the one who created the file.I think we only put Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License to show that you've created the file,don't you think.Now singer/recording company/film's producers can't hold copyright authority of ogg files.Song is used just to show the music style that 90's movies usually had.Please do correct me,if i'm missing something. Thank You -25 CENTS VICTORIOUS^☣ 15:26, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No you did not create it. You are not the producer, recording company or Alka Yagnik. Just cutting a copyrighted work doesn't make it free. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 09:56, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Here creation means creation of ogg file.Like i said only file creator holds copyright tag.Beside these files are listed for deletion for deletion only if they violate any Wikipedia policy.May i know those policies this file violating ? --25 CENTS VICTORIOUS^☣ 14:21, 29 July 2012 (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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 13:06, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vivaah still.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Plumcouch ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Image fails WP:NFCC#8 as it has no contextual significance. It's deletion would not be detrimental to article's understanding. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 13:47, 18 July 2012 (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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 13:06, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vivah families.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Plumcouch ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Image fails WP:NFCC#8 as it has no contextual significance. It's deletion would not be detrimental to article's understanding. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 13:48, 18 July 2012 (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 as F5 by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:04, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Filipelli Swimsuit Calendar Cover.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Writer4255 ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).

File is listed as fair use as a "unique historic image". However, this is simply a copy of a copyrighted calendar cover, showing a particular model. No rationale is given for why free media could not be used. (This field of the fair use template is explicitly listed as "n.a.". The fact is that any number of free media could be used -- this model is a public figure who is available for photography at any number of events, so copyrighted images are not needed, and fail the fair use criteria. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:20, 18 July 2012 (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 as F5 by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:04, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Filipelli in Ad.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File is listed as fair use as a "station ID or program content". However, this is simply a copy of a copyrighted advertisement, showing a particular model. No rationale is given for why free media could not be used. (This field of the fair use template is explicitly listed as "n.a.". The fact is that any number of free media could be used -- this model is a public figure who is available for photography at any number of events, so copyrighted images are not needed, and fail the fair use criteria. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:20, 18 July 2012 (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 Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 06:05, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Anthrapurpurin.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Sananda chatterjee ( | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Chemically incorrect, low general quality, unused. Anthrapurpurin does not have hydrogen (white ball) on the ring-carbon (black ball) when oxygen (red ball) is attached, and the right-side ring has the wrong number of oxygens attached to it. Have correct and high-quality File:Anthrapurpurin-3D-balls.png as suitable replacement. DMacks (talk) 20:45, 18 July 2012 (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.