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⚡ 07:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cicismap.PNG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Strongbad1982 (notify | contribs).

• Unused. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 00:54, 22 September 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:11, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

• FU image that is not necessary to understand subject. The only information imparted is his appearance, and we already have a free image. ÷seresin 02:48, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, the nominator has tried to delete just about every photo of the hijacker possible; these images do not have commercial value, are low-resolution and contribute to the understanding of these men and their actions. Sherurcij ^{(speaker for the dead)} 13:12, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - This is a non-free image. We already have a free one in the article.--Rockfang (talk) 07:18, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. As there is already a free image in the article to identify the subject, there's no reason for this non-free image to be used without any critical commentary that increases the readers' understanding. — ξ^xplicit 05:28, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Is there more to the context of this photo? The only description I can see is that "a university photo" and "It shows him in a scholastic setting." which by itself I don't think is enough to justify non free use. NGX463 (talk) 21:48, 26 September 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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:08, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Atta atm.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Quadell (notify | contribs).

• FU image that is not necessary to understand subject. We do not need to see a picture of the men at an ATM to understand that they used one. Only other information imparted is their appearance, and both articles have a suitable free image. ÷seresin 02:50, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, the nominator has tried to delete just about every photo of the hijacker possible; these images do not have commercial value, are low-resolution and contribute to the understanding of these men and their actions. Sherurcij ^{(speaker for the dead)} 13:11, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. As there is already a free image in the article to identify the subject, there's no reason for this non-free image to be used without any critical commentary that increases the readers' understanding. — ξ^xplicit 05:28, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Security cameras have no creativity in positioning nor creative control over what they're capturing, so their images have no copyright. [1] is a US court ruling thta "because the surveillance video lacks sufficient originality, it is not subject to copyright". It's ((tl:PD-ineligible))--Prosfilaes (talk) 19:58, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - That link you provided goes to a motion, not a ruling. The quote you shared was made by a lawyer, not a judge.--Rockfang (talk) 20:24, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Quite right; I didn't look at it closely enough, just copied it from the discussion on Commons. I think the point is accurate, though.--Prosfilaes (talk) 20:35, 30 September 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: keep, mostly on the strength of Prosfilaes' argument (which I note would also justify keeping the other image just above, in my personal opinion). NGX463's argument seems somewhat weaker; those by Sherurcij and the anon don't really address the NFC issue, so I note that if it wasn't for the "no creativity" argument, this would come out as a delete too. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:46, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Atta in airport.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Aude (notify | contribs).

• FU image that is not necessary to understand subject. We do not need an image to understand that the men went through security. ÷seresin 02:53, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, the nominator has tried to delete just about every photo of the hijacker possible; these images do not have commercial value, are low-resolution and contribute to the understanding of these men and their actions. Sherurcij ^{(speaker for the dead)} 13:11, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. As there is already a free image in the article to identify the subject, there's no reason for this non-free image to be used without any critical commentary that increases the readers' understanding. — ξ^xplicit 05:28, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, Not only useful to identify the subject, but also valuable in that it shows the state of pre 9/11 airport security, ie: provides inside into how the attack was carried out. Of the tree images of Atta up for deletion, I think this is the one where the delete rational is weakest. NGX463 (talk) 21:51, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as a PD-Ineligible security camera (per my comments on Atta atm.jpg above), or as a fair use photo showing details of the events that transpired (per NGX463).--Prosfilaes (talk) 19:58, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - My comment in the discussion right above this one applies as well.--Rockfang (talk) 20:25, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This photo is part of the visual history of 9/11/2001. As a result, it is featured on Wikipedia for educational purposes. Please do not delete. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.171.198.249 (talk) 23:02, 1 October 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:11, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Development of Uromanometer, Lahore, Punjab Province, Pakistan, 14.06.1982jpg.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by SwabiVal' (notify | contribs).

• Unencyclopedic, appears to be part of someone's thesis project Skier Dude (talk) 04:27, 22 September 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:11, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Development of Uroflowmeter, Lahore, Punjab Province, Pakistan, 17.12.1981jpg.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by SwabiVal' (notify | contribs).

• Unencyclopedic, appears to be part of someone's thesis project Skier Dude (talk) 04:27, 22 September 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:11, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Sole Non-European EAU Support Fund Award, Paris, France, 2006-04-05 jpg.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by SwabiVal' (notify | contribs).

• Unencyclopedic, subjects not identified, poor quality Skier Dude (talk) 04:28, 22 September 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:11, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vlcsnap-171098.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Antho05 (notify | contribs).

• This screenshot really doesn't add anything to the Long Way 2 Go article. Ricky81682 (talk) 06:02, 22 September 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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 15:08, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sachsenhausen2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by DO'Neil (notify | contribs).

• still no license: [2] -- 92.227.115.36 (talk) 06:04, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment/Question - It may be public domain. I've updated the ARC id for the photo. The photo was apparently taken in 1938. Would ((PD-US-1996)) and ((PD-GermanGov)) apply here?--Rockfang (talk) 07:40, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - ((PD-GermanGov)) does not apply. Obviously, it is not a statute, ordinance, official decree or judgment. -- 78.55.50.82 (talk) 06:17, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What about the "official work" part of the template?--Rockfang (talk) 07:37, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The law, that this template cites, mainly applies to documents and usually _not_ to photographs. If you want to use this photograph under that law, you will need to find evidence that this was created by the government and the published by the government in an official publication. I doubt that this has happened. Regards, --ChrisiPK (talk) 12:47, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is highly likely that this was created by the government at the time. It was taken at a Nazi concentration camp. I doubt anyone other than the SS at the camp would be allowed to take a picture. I'm not sure about how/if it was published by the government though. Hopefully someone else will have some thoughts on that.--Rockfang (talk) 01:07, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please note: PD-GermanGov is essentially different than PD-USGov. In the US all government-created works are PD, in Germany this is not the case. So unless this image was part of one of the publications the template cites, there is no way this can be PD-GermanGov. Regards, --ChrisiPK (talk) 13:06, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• What a nonsense discussion, do you really think the German government would sue anyone for posting that picture? 82.182.98.96 (talk) 23:47, 3 October 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:11, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vlcsnap-1361413.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Skier Dude (notify | contribs).

• This image's usage at Theatrical_superstitions#The_Scottish_play is adequately described by the text alone and the only other logical place could be The Regina Monologues, which seems fine without it. Ricky81682 (talk) 06:06, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This was initially uploaded by me for use on The Regina Monologues but has been replaced w/ the preferred non-free promotional image File:The Regina Monologues.png. Agree that use on Theatrical_superstitions#The_Scottish_play could be served by much better images. Skier Dude (talk) 07:39, 22 September 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⚡ 07:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Boynes.fullportrait.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Ljh.rms (notify | contribs).

• No longer needed after Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Janet Boynes.  Sandstein  06:18, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - File only used for article about non-notable author which was deleted at AfD. No longer needed. <>Multi-Xfer<> (talk) 21:57, 28 September 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:11, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vlcsnap-309300.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs).

• Necessary "to explain a trivia item" is not what WP:NFCC is for. Ricky81682 (talk) 06:18, 22 September 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:11, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:TLK1.5-24.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Scalytail (notify | contribs).

• This image doesn't add anything to Simba, the way File:Vlcsnap-5068406.png or any of the others do. Ricky81682 (talk) 06:37, 22 September 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⚡ 07:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:CA Alameda Alpine & Amador Counties.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Rfc1394 (notify | contribs).

• Obsolete and Orphaned image. Image is currently unused, and were it ever to be needed should be recreated as a higher resolution image, especially one based on File:California county map (labeled).svg. Part of a series of images with three California counties highlighted per image, all linked from Template:California County Maps. Optigan13 (talk) 07:17, 22 September 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⚡ 07:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:CA Butte Calaveras & Colusa Counties.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Rfc1394 (notify | contribs).

• Obsolete and Orphaned image. Image is currently unused, and were it ever to be needed should be recreated as a higher resolution image, especially one based on File:California county map (labeled).svg. Part of a series of images with three California counties highlighted per image, all linked from Template:California County Maps. Optigan13 (talk) 07:19, 22 September 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⚡ 07:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:CA Contra Costa-Imperial counties 300.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Rfc1394 (notify | contribs).

• Obsolete and Orphaned image. Image is currently unused, and were it ever to be needed should be recreated as a higher resolution image, especially one based on File:California county map (labeled).svg. Part of a series of images with three (or more) California counties highlighted per image, all linked from Template:California County Maps. Optigan13 (talk) 07:20, 22 September 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⚡ 07:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:CA Inyo-Mariposa counties 300.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Rfc1394 (notify | contribs).

• Obsolete and Orphaned image. Image is currently unused, and were it ever to be needed should be recreated as a higher resolution image, especially one based on File:California county map (labeled).svg. Part of a series of images with three (or more) California counties highlighted per image, all linked from Template:California County Maps. Optigan13 (talk) 07:20, 22 September 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⚡ 07:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:CA Mendocino-Nevada counties 300.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Rfc1394 (notify | contribs).

• Obsolete and Orphaned image. Image is currently unused, and were it ever to be needed should be recreated as a higher resolution image, especially one based on File:California county map (labeled).svg. Part of a series of images with three (or more) California counties highlighted per image, all linked from Template:California County Maps. Optigan13 (talk) 07:21, 22 September 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⚡ 07:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:CA Orange-San Benito counties 300.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Rfc1394 (notify | contribs).

• Obsolete and Orphaned image. Image is currently unused, and were it ever to be needed should be recreated as a higher resolution image, especially one based on File:California county map (labeled).svg. Part of a series of images with three (or more) California counties highlighted per image, all linked from Template:California County Maps. Optigan13 (talk) 07:21, 22 September 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⚡ 07:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:CA San Bernadino-Santa Cruz counties 300.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Rfc1394 (notify | contribs).

• Obsolete and Orphaned image. Image is currently unused, and were it ever to be needed should be recreated as a higher resolution image, especially one based on File:California county map (labeled).svg. Part of a series of images with three (or more) California counties highlighted per image, all linked from Template:California County Maps. Optigan13 (talk) 07:21, 22 September 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⚡ 07:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:CA Shasta-Sutter counties 300.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Rfc1394 (notify | contribs).

• Obsolete and Orphaned image. Image is currently unused, and were it ever to be needed should be recreated as a higher resolution image, especially one based on File:California county map (labeled).svg. Part of a series of images with three (or more) California counties highlighted per image, all linked from Template:California County Maps. Optigan13 (talk) 07:22, 22 September 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⚡ 07:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:CA Trinity-Yuba counties 300.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Rfc1394 (notify | contribs).

• Obsolete and Orphaned image. Image is currently unused, and were it ever to be needed should be recreated as a higher resolution image, especially one based on File:California county map (labeled).svg. Part of a series of images with three (or more) California counties highlighted per image, all linked from Template:California County Maps. Optigan13 (talk) 07:22, 22 September 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. uploader agreed to deletion: [3]. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 16:24, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:STRIPES.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by JME8205 (notify | contribs).

• No description, no encyclopedic value. The uploader didn't respond to my request (at his talkpage) for a description of what the image is and how s/he intends to use it. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 17:47, 22 September 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: keep, no evidence of copyright violation (and if the nominator's argument is true and the uploader is in fact a promotional account connected to that company, it's all the more likely they actually own the copyright. There's some possibly ugly COI editing on the one side here, and definitely some ugly harassment on the other, but neither of these is an issue for FFD. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:14, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:PODS Championship.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Twalters82 (notify | contribs).

• Corporate spam and orphaned file PODs Watch (talk) 21:41, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Close. Nominator, by virtue of name and actions, appears to be a special purpose account with some sort of vendetta against PODS. So for that reason alone, this should be closed, with no prejudice to renomination in the future. — PyTom (talk) 19:07, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the photo was to be used on Transitions_Championship, where it CLEARLY discusses the PODS CHAMPIONSHIP, which is what the picture references. The issue is that the user, PODs Watch, has a weird vendetta against the organization, as the user is a competitor to PODS and has vandalized previous articles, posts, images about the organization. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Twalters82 (talk • contribs) 19:34, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from a neutral editor In PODs Watch's 11 contributions, there is no sign of harassment of Twalters82 - the only comments left on the latter's talk page is notification of Ffd nominations, and explaining the removal of part of the PODS (company) article. There was one vandalism of that article 2 weeks ago, but other than that, no overt harassment that I can see. (Incidently, I was left a message about this - that is why I am here, but I am neutral about the company). -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 23:39, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment'. User:Twalters82 is just a spammer for PODS and has been warned 3 times about WP:COI,anyway it matters not the image is still Spam and is still an Orphan. Pip Pip. 86.139.84.237 (talk) 04:01, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy Delete. Copyvio, image is lifted from PODs company literature which is copyrighted not Public Domain. 82.132.139.133 (talk) 06:19, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Question - Is there any proof this is a copyvio?--Rockfang (talk) 10:13, 25 September 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⚡ 07:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:CAMap-doton-Pittsburg.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Bumm13 (notify | contribs).

• Obsolete, replaced by vector maps and template dot placement. Image is also orphaned with no current usage. Optigan13 (talk) 23:19, 22 September 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⚡ 07:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:CarlsbadCALM.GIF (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Short Verses (notify | contribs).

• Obsolete locator map, replaced by vector equivalent. See image page for vector link. Orphaned with no file links. Optigan13 (talk) 23:24, 22 September 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⚡ 07:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cerritos in LA County map.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Mackerm (notify | contribs).

• Obsolete locator map, replaced by vector equivalent. See image page for vector link. Orphaned with no file links. Optigan13 (talk) 23:25, 22 September 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⚡ 07:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cherryland in Alameda County.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Hottentot (notify | contribs).

• Obsolete locator map, replaced by vector equivalent. See image page for vector link. Orphaned with no file links. Optigan13 (talk) 23:27, 22 September 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⚡ 07:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dublin in Alameda County.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Hottentot (notify | contribs).

• Obsolete locator map, replaced by vector equivalent. See image page for vector link. Orphaned with no file links. Optigan13 (talk) 23:28, 22 September 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⚡ 07:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fairview in Alameda County.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Hottentot (notify | contribs).

• Obsolete locator map, replaced by vector equivalent. See image page for vector link. Orphaned with no file links. Optigan13 (talk) 23:30, 22 September 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⚡ 07:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Livermore in Alameda County.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Hottentot (notify | contribs).

• Obsolete locator map, replaced by vector equivalent. See image page for vector link. Orphaned with no file links. Optigan13 (talk) 23:31, 22 September 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.