Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 November 16

< November 15	November 17 >

November 16

File:View of the Delaware Water Gap SE Dunfield.jpg

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 F8 by Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

source seems to be a broken link that never led to the image in the first place. I wasn't able to find the image using a reverse image search. Anyone else have a good method to search the USGS site? Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:35, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Source found, thanks to Drewmutt (talk · contribs)'s efforts. Transferred to Commons. Jon Kolbert (talk) 00:20, 17 November 2017 (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:Pie Chart Exportation Rates Zhengte.png

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

non-notable company, no encyclopedic value. Jon Kolbert (talk) 05:30, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 09:23, 18 November 2017 (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:Pie Chart Production Zhengte.png

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

non-notable company, no encyclopedic value. Jon Kolbert (talk) 05:30, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 09:23, 18 November 2017 (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:Map indicating Zhengte.png

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

non-notable company, no encyclopedic value. Jon Kolbert (talk) 05:31, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 09:23, 18 November 2017 (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:Fantastic1.jpg

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free screenshot of Stan Lee in character as Willie Lumpkin in Fantastic Four (2005 film). The use of this file in Marvel films lacks the context required for non-free use by WP:NFCC#8. Lee has made quite a number of cameo appearances in Marvel films and there's nothing particularly notable about his appearance as Lumpkin in this particular one to justify the file's use in the BLP about Lee. The screenshot itself is not the subject of any sourced critical commentary and its only purpose seem to be show Lee in character which is a type of decorative non-free use which is not really allowed. Moreover, the file is being used in an embedded list and the use of non-free images for individual entries of lists, etc. is not really allowed per WP:NFLISTS. Suggest remove from the article since their does not seem to be any possible way to justify this type of non-free use.

The non-free use of the file in Willie Lumpkin#Film also seems a bit questionable per NFCC#8 since Lee's appearance in the film might be notable because it is the first time he is supposed to have done so, but the way he looked in character is not necessarily as notable for reasons similar to those given in WP:ITSHISTORIC. The reader does really need to see the screenshot to understand the article content about the appearance, so removing the file would not be detrimental to that understanding. So, it's not really clear how this particular use improves the reader's understanding to the degree typically required by NFCC#8. Suggest remove from the article, but willing to reconsider as keep if further sourced critical content about the character's appearance is added to the article to strengthen the connection between article content and non-free image. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:49, 16 November 2017 (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:William Preston Lane on Chesapeake Bay Bridge.jpg

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 the portrait. ℯ xplicit 00:27, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free image being used in Chesapeake Bay Bridge and William Preston Lane Jr., but only the use in the Lane Jr. article seems possibly appropriate. Lane is deceased and the image is being used as the primary means of identification in the main infobox which is generally considered acceptable per WP:NFCC#1; however, there is also another non-free image File:Governor william preston lane jr of maryland.jpg being used in the article and two non-free images are not needed WP:NFCC#3a for identification purposes. So, one of the two needs to go.

The use in the bridge article, however, appears more decorative that contextual and has problems with NFCC#1 and WP:NFCC#8. The photo cannot be used to identify either Lane or the bridge per NFCC#1; moreover, although there is content about the bridge being named after Lane in the article, none of that requires the reader to actually see this photo to be understoood and there is no specific critical commentary about the photo itself in the article so NFCC#8 is not really satisfied. The article about Lane is wikilinked in the lead and in the section about the span construction, and the reader can see the image by going to that article; so, the file does not really seem to be needed per item 6 of WP:NFC#UUI.

Suggest remove from the bridge article for "File:William Preston Lane on Chesapeake Bay Bridge.jpg" and suggest keep for only one of the non-free photos of Lane for the stand-alone article about him. Which file is kept can be determined by consensus, but both are not needed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:18, 16 November 2017 (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:Deftones 1997.jpg

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a non-free image being used in Around the Fur and Deftones. This fails WP:NFCC#10c as each article does not have its own separate non-free rationale. As well, the image does not significantly add to the reader's understanding of each subject. Whpq (talk) 11:59, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. As with the other similar images taken from Flickr by this uploader, I cannot see how the non-free use of this type of concert photo could possibly satisfy WP:NFCC#1 or WP:NFCC#8. This photo as well as the others are simply too decorative and lack the contextual significance required for non-free use. As a side note, there are probably more of these files whose non-free use justification is questionable at best uploaded by the editor which probably could be tagged with {{rfu}}. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:36, 16 November 2017 (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:Sangley Point International Airport aerial view.jpeg

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Likely copyright violation as claim of own work is dubious. Image appears on this site and the wayback machine shows an archive of at least as early as 4 Nov 2016 which predates this upload by a year and half. Whpq (talk) 13:21, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination unless the uploader is somehow able to verify their copyright ownership via OTRS. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:27, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, essentially orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 09:24, 18 November 2017 (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:IE PNG bug.png

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Only being used in stale drafts and I'm having difficulty verifying the license number. Probably don't need this? ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 14:41, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, essentially orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 09:24, 18 November 2017 (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:Epica 3U 2.jpg

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This was uploaded by an "organizational" account and it's unclear whether the person who uploaded is the person who took this picture. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 15:00, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, essentially orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 09:25, 18 November 2017 (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:Ep-4429 fo.jpg

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This was uploaded by an "organizational" account and it's unclear whether the person who uploaded is the person who took this picture. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 15:00, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, essentially orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 09:25, 18 November 2017 (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:CaptainLarryChambers.jpg

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Source indicates the photo is from the "USS MIDWAY MUSEUM", not from the US Navy. Jon Kolbert (talk) 20:47, 16 November 2017 (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:Paul Ngue, exercising (1).jpg

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Metadata of user's uploads is inconsistent, photos are web-quality, perhaps from Instagram or other mediums. No confidence these are uploader's own work as claimed. Jon Kolbert (talk) 20:55, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete as a copyvio - see 2:46 mark of this video. -- Whpq (talk) 00:53, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, essentially orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 09:26, 18 November 2017 (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:Paul Ngue, exercising (2).jpg

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Metadata of user's uploads is inconsistent, photos are web-quality, perhaps from Instagram or other mediums. No confidence these are uploader's own work as claimed. Jon Kolbert (talk) 20:55, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete as a copyvio. See 10:009 mark of this video. -- Whpq (talk) 00:56, 17 November 2017 (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:Treino Score.jpg

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Metadata of user's uploads is inconsistent, photos are web-quality, perhaps from Instagram or other mediums. No confidence these are uploader's own work as claimed. Jon Kolbert (talk) 20:55, 16 November 2017 (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:Dia de Jogo 1.jpg

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Metadata of user's uploads is inconsistent, photos are web-quality, perhaps from Instagram or other mediums. No confidence these are uploader's own work as claimed. Jon Kolbert (talk) 20:55, 16 November 2017 (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:Dia de Jogo 2.jpg

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Metadata of user's uploads is inconsistent, photos are web-quality, perhaps from Instagram or other mediums. No confidence these are uploader's own work as claimed. Jon Kolbert (talk) 20:56, 16 November 2017 (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:Dia de Jogo 3.jpg

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Metadata of user's uploads is inconsistent, photos are web-quality, perhaps from Instagram or other mediums. No confidence these are uploader's own work as claimed. Jon Kolbert (talk) 20:56, 16 November 2017 (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:Game Celtic 2.jpg

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Metadata of user's uploads is inconsistent, photos are web-quality, perhaps from Instagram or other mediums. No confidence these are uploader's own work as claimed. Jon Kolbert (talk) 20:56, 16 November 2017 (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:Perfil Olivier.jpg

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Metadata of user's uploads is inconsistent, photos are web-quality, perhaps from Instagram or other mediums. No confidence these are uploader's own work as claimed. Jon Kolbert (talk) 20:56, 16 November 2017 (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:Dia de Jogo 4.jpg

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Metadata of user's uploads is inconsistent, photos are web-quality, perhaps from Instagram or other mediums. No confidence these are uploader's own work as claimed. Jon Kolbert (talk) 20:56, 16 November 2017 (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:Dia de jogo 5.jpg

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Metadata of user's uploads is inconsistent, photos are web-quality, perhaps from Instagram or other mediums. No confidence these are uploader's own work as claimed. Jon Kolbert (talk) 20:57, 16 November 2017 (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:JohnPopperNY.jpg

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

low-quality image, plenty of superior images available. Jon Kolbert (talk) 21:05, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 09:27, 18 November 2017 (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:Double back zipper.jpg

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:07, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No indication that the subjects of the image consented to being photographed, low-quality image. The dodgy circumstances surrounding the origin of the photograph makes it unsuitable for encyclopedic use. Easily replaceable with a photo with consenting subjects. Jon Kolbert (talk) 21:18, 16 November 2017 (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:Tweeterstore.jpg

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

extremely low-quality, superior images available Jon Kolbert (talk) 21:20, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 09:28, 18 November 2017 (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:New Quill Logo.jpg

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

feather likely exceeds the threshold of originality, superseded by File:Quill Corporation logo.png Jon Kolbert (talk) 21:33, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, redundant to PNG file and with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 09:29, 18 November 2017 (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:MiltonBradleyLogo.png

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

superseded by File:Milton Bradley Company logo.svg Jon Kolbert (talk) 21:56, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, redundant to SVG file. Salavat (talk) 09:30, 18 November 2017 (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:Cartoon Planet 2012.png

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The screenshot is used in the "Revival era" section Cartoon Planetand has no critical commentary. The screenshot fails WP:NFCC#1 since the text "which leaves Brak and Zorak the only characters hosting" is sufficient to describe what is in the screenshot without the screenshot being present and fails WP:NFCC#8 because there is no critical commentary about the screenshot thereby doing nothing to increase the reader's understanding of the show and its exclusion is not detrimental to the understanding of the show. Aspects (talk) 23:54, 16 November 2017 (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.