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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 05:04, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mariah Carey-Butterfly.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Petergriffin9901 (notify | contribs | uploads).

• Seems doubtful to me that this is self-made. It was just uploaded a few days ago, but tineye has three versions of this image cached already. None of the cached images are dated, but tineye works so slowly that it is highly unlikely that it has been spread from wikipedia that quickly. Calliopejen1 (talk) 02:28, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• • It sure was taken. I have uploaded that from someone who personally took it and gave it to me. So I don't see the problem.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 02:41, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, you've credited to yourself, so that's the first problem.... Who actually took it? Even if this is actually a free image, you'll have to have your friend follow the steps at WP:CONSENT to give permission. Also, did your friend previously upload this on the internet? If so, where? Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:07, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Ok sorry, didn't know that would be an issue if I was given the image. Hmmm, I don't think so, but to be honest there are allot of similar photos of Carey during this tour. So what do I need to do now? I'll fix the consent thing.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 16:00, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete - no evidence of permission. Off2riorob (talk) 16:10, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Now I found this image posted in a random forum two months before it was uploaded here.[1] Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:23, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well done, I had a look for it and didn't find it, I would like to know Calliopejeni, how you went about searching, perhaps on my talk or via email. Is it possible to get the uploader to explain, how he thought the picture was his to license to the public domain? If they are unsure about copyright it is better they don't upload any more pictures or files untill they have read and understood WP:COPYRIGHT. - Off2riorob (talk) 16:24, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here is another one from a Thai forum in 1 พ.ย. 49, which means November 1 2549 (=2006 in Western calendar)[2]. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:31, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Unless an OTRS is obtained for it the uploaders comment of I have uploaded that from someone who personally took it and gave it to me in not sufficient permission. Also I notice this was tagged as being on Wikimedia Commons but it isn't. Soundvisions1 (talk) 04:08, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's because it's been deleted from the commons as a copyvio already. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:01, 21 November 2010 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 05:04, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:PangolinLogo.png (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by DarkMask (notify | contribs | uploads).

• Was used in concession (webcomic) which was deleted. No need to keep it around. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 02:50, 18 November 2010 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 05:04, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Concession300.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by DarkMask (notify | contribs | uploads).

• Was used in Concession (webcomic) which was deleted. No need to keep it around. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 02:50, 18 November 2010 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 05:04, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Concessioncast.PNG (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by DarkMask (notify | contribs | uploads).

• Was used in Concession (webcomic) which was deleted. No need to keep it around. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 02:51, 18 November 2010 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 05:04, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Concessionlogo.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by DarkMask (notify | contribs | uploads).

• Was used in Concession (webcomic) which was deleted. No need to keep it around. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 02:51, 18 November 2010 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 05:04, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Heartofitall.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by DarkMask (notify | contribs | uploads).

• Related to Concession (webcomic) which was deleted. See above. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 03:04, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, don't see any further use of it. Rehman 03:42, 19 November 2010 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:10, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hitomi Kobayashi.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Dekkappai (notify | contribs | uploads).

• Copyrighted picture being used in the infobox of a BLP when it is totally possible to get a free one. The way it is being used is an incorrect fair use rationale. There is no actual excuse to use it and it is totally possible to get a commons valid picture. The escuse that is being used is totally unsupported by anything but opinion .. allegedly another person working in a similar position sueded someone to protect their privacy ... there is no cited detail connecting that to this person. It is still possible that someone has a commons picture or that one can be obtained. Off2riorob (talk) 11:40, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep To explain: the subject is a former Japanese porn star who has since retired. A different porn star (Kaoru Kuroki) sued and won for infrignement of privacy when a magazine ran a story on her, including pictures, detailing her life after retirement. See here for the story (as reported by UPI). I honestly don't see how we can get a photo of one given the legal precedent made in Japan. Tabercil (talk) 13:15, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We don't work to legal precedents set in Japan., or we would also not host the picture due to japanese portrait . It is totally possible commons licensed pictures are available just that we haven't got one. Please remember, we don't have to have a picture and that there is no time limit to add a picture either. Off2riorob (talk) 13:24, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

comment, err yes we do, if she sues us wikipedia will still go to court regardless, we have to obey all copyright laws everywhere —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lerdthenerd (talk • contribs) 17:48, 18 November 2010

I doubt you're a lawyer, and so I doubt you're qualified to give legal advice. Please read Wikipedia:Non-U.S. copyrights for the official Wikipedia guideline on non-U.S. copyrights. —Bkell (talk) 17:57, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Also, the other woman sued because someone published details about her private life, not because someone published her photo. If Hitomi Kobayashi does want to protect her privacy, that's more of a reason not to include her image. Epbr123 (talk) 13:26, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

comment - Such weak claims of fair use rationale go against the mission of the foundation, in that it is to ..."empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free content license," ...Such EDPs must be minimal. Their use, with limited exception, should be to illustrate historically significant events, to include identifying protected works such as logos, or to complement (within narrow limits) articles about copyrighted contemporary works. An EDP may not allow material where we can reasonably expect someone to upload a freely licensed file for the same purpose, such as is the case for almost all portraits of living notable individuals...clearly in this case the claim of exemption is a weak one indeed with no educational excuse. foundation licencing policy this is the resolution on which our non free use policy rests. - Off2riorob (talk) 14:58, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep discussion on the talk page has told me that it was a picture taken during her retirement that resulted in a lawsuit, we are safe with this one as it was taken during her career, the picture belongs to the company she is a model for.--Lerdthenerd (talk) 17:44, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you could reread the discussion above, it is the fact that the picture belongs to someone and is not free that is the issue. Off2riorob (talk) 18:01, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: We do not allow fair use images of living people as "decorations", or in main info boxes. The fact that "the subject is a former Japanese porn star who has since retired" would only be relevant if the image was being used it illustrate their porn career - this is not by any means illustrating the subject as an adult actor, just an image being used in the main infobox to illustrate the subject. There is a difference. As an example File:Hitomi Kobayashi Hard Petting.jpg is being used in the article already, and that not only illustrates her as an adult actor it is also being used to illustrate the product. (It is a secondary discussion but the article is also using File:Hitomi Kobayashi Young Girl Story.jpg, File:Hitomi Kobayashi Final 1.jpg and File:Hitomi Kobayashi Final 2.jpg in the article bringing the amount of fair use images currently used in the article to five) It is also highly unlikely that, as the "Queen of AV", nobody ever took a "free" photograph between 1986 and 2003, when she was active in the industry. Soundvisions1 (talk) 23:00, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and per Soundvisions. We went through this entire issue, in precisely the same context (retired Japanese porn performers), at ANI, at FFD, and at the relevant policy talk page during the summer and the consensus that use like this violates WP:NFCC was overwhelming (example, [3]). As is pointed out, here and elsewhere, the "Japanese law" claim rests only on a single press report of a single case, which doesn't even mention pictures -- and we don't even know how that case was finally resolved. Despite extensive prior discussions, no one has found any examples of an article where a nonfree image has been allowed in a BLP infobox, although hundreds if not thousands of such usages have been removed, 99%+ of the time without even minimal dispute. Policy is clear and enjoys strong copmmunity support; we don't need to revisit this issue at length every time an old violation turns up. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 14:50, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, standard assumption that non-free photos of living people are replaceable has not been refuted. Stifle (talk) 15:27, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Rollback to the 2007 image, that one is a promophoto; and as this is a bio about a porn star, it should illustrate her as she appeared when she starred in pornos. 76.66.194.212 (talk) 06:40, 20 November 2010 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:10, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Trudeaujustwatch.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Habsfannova (notify | contribs | uploads).

• This is a screenshot of a television interview with Pierre Trudeau during the October Crisis, which is used to illustrate the article about the phrase "Just watch me" which he uttered during that time (perhaps even during this interview, but I don't know). However, we have free images of Mr. Trudeau, and this image does not significantly contribute to readers' understanding of the phrase "Just watch me"—I, for one, gain no understanding about the phrase from seeing this photo. Thus it appears to fail WP:NFCC#1 and WP:NFCC#8. —Bkell (talk) 12:02, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, per nom. Rehman 03:40, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, this picture is taken from the very interview where he said "Just Watch Me", the context for this article is perfect, and I wouldn't learn anymore about the event from a different photo of Trudeau. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.237.234.174 (talk) 04:31, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Agree with the nom and will add on that the FUR implies that this individual frame of video should be used because it shows a pivotal moment in Canadian history, yet the actual article it is being used in does not indicate the frame grab itself illustrates any "pivotal moment in Canadian history", nor does the article appear even to be *about* the frame of video at all but, rather, "a phrase made famous by Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau on October 13, 1970, during the October crisis." In looking over *that* article there is no indication that this frame of video is really of any importance either. It is the phrase that gets a passing mention in the Timeline section of the article, and it is the phrase that gets a bit more detailed discussion in the War Measures Act and military involvement, not this frame of video. Given the entire Just watch me article is about a spoken phrase, the Excerpt from interview significantly illustrates the context of the subject of the article. The frame grab adds nothing and is purely decorative. Soundvisions1 (talk) 03:11, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Soundvisions1. Decorative, fails WP:NFCC#8. Stifle (talk) 12:11, 24 November 2010 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:10, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:TAN-1057 C.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Yidele (notify | contribs | uploads).

• Orphaned (replaced in TAN-1057 C) file, poor quality. Leyo 12:48, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: The replacement file is not identical to this file. Rehman 03:34, 19 November 2010 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:10, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chem-Mech-AcylChlorideAcylium.png (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Jag123 (notify | contribs | uploads).

• Orphaned, low quality/resolution. Leyo 12:51, 18 November 2010 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:10, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:FattyAcid-MB-Hydration.png (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Jag123 (notify | contribs | uploads).

• Orphaned, low quality/resolution. Leyo 12:53, 18 November 2010 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:10, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:FattyAcid-MB-OxidationByFAD.png (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Jag123 (notify | contribs | uploads).

• Orphaned, low quality/resolution. Leyo 12:53, 18 November 2010 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:10, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:OChem-Mech-CarbocationFormation.png (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Jag123 (notify | contribs | uploads).

• Orphaned, low quality/resolution. Leyo 12:54, 18 November 2010 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:10, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:OChem-Reaction-FCAcylation-Chloride.png (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Jag123 (notify | contribs | uploads).

• Orphaned, low quality/resolution. Leyo 12:54, 18 November 2010 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:10, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:OChem-Reaction-FCAlkylation.png (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Jag123 (notify | contribs | uploads).

• Orphaned, low quality/resolution. Leyo 12:54, 18 November 2010 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:10, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:PentosePhosphatePathway-OxidativeNADPH.png (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Jag123 (notify | contribs | uploads).

• Orphaned/replaced in Pentose phosphate pathway. Leyo 12:56, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, replacement file is good enough. Rehman 03:30, 19 November 2010 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:10, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mariah-Carey-Charmbraclettour.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Petergriffin9901 (notify | contribs | uploads).

• Two of user's other Mariah Carey images are blatant copyright violations taken from elsewhere on the internet. I can't find this one, but I doubt it's any different. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:48, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - user is a serial copyright violator and is blocked because of it. Off2riorob (talk) 17:05, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, per nom, and Off2riorob. Rehman 03:28, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Because of the users upload history there is no reason to feel this is their own work. Combine that with the fact they commented on another files (File:Mariah Carey-Butterfly.jpg) deletion discussion by saying the image was given to them *and* on their talk page said "I did not lie about these images, they were given to me by my friends on Facebook who have been to these shows" it is beyond any doubt this, and the other, image are not valid ((PD-self)) licenses. Without an OTRS for the images it needs to go. (And the block spoken of above was removed) Soundvisions1 (talk) 04:21, 19 November 2010 (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. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 21:32, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Merita TV.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) – uploaded by Tooclassy4most (notify | contribs | uploads).

• Not sure the rationale fits here. This non-free image from Hostess is being used to illustrate the fact that Merita Bread "was the first advertiser in the South to sponsor a network television program." However, the image is far from iconic; it appears to just be a family watching television. I don't see why this justifies the use of a non-free image. (ESkog)^(Talk) 21:54, 18 November 2010 (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.