The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 13:50, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I had previously tagged this image as having no source and no rationale. Both tags were removed without fixing either problem. The given source is "TV Screenshot". (Any particular TV station or program? Did they all collectively create the image?) In any event, no critical commentary regarding this TV program is offered - it's just used decoratively in the infobox because it happens to show the subject of the article. There is no legitimate fair use claim for using a random TV show screenshot for something other than critical commentary regarding the program itself, actors, etc. This isn't an article about news coverage. B (talk) 02:58, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:58, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Altered version of an image at this page (under 5th April 2008), which is presumably under copyright. Image is used to illustrate an article which is currently up for deletion as a hoax; see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kisorsa. TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation 10:49, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:07, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think this rationale applies to this image. If anything, someone should make their own shot of KLC or daiads or whatever. Kayau Voting IS evil 14:11, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: speedy delete as G7. The nominator is also the uploader, and they appeared to have had no clue. I consider it most likely that this file was uploaded in error. Additionally, as the item was orphaned anyway, I saw no reason not to speedy delete this for them. SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:14, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
image mistakenly listed as public domain, image is in copyright and permission is not given for usage. Please delete from server. Thank you. Rpoj (talk) 19:31, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: delete as redundant. BigDom 18:02, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Replaced by a higher-quality image on Commons from the Google Art Project. Replacement image: File:Daniël Mijtens - Portrait of James Hamilton, Earl of Arran, Later 3rd Marquis and 1st Duke of Hamilton, Aged 17 - Google Art Project.jpg Xover (talk) 21:08, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: delete all. One should, however, use caution with using the Flickr images to show knockoff products. It is likely that one will still need to fair-use the Flickr images on here because it would be a derivative work of a copyrighted (albeit illegally-produced) product. SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:21, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Photo allegedly from businessinsider.com, although I can't find two of the four in their gallery. (Note that the two that are from there, they credit both as being from another site). The photos are being decoratively used to show knock-off products. The are all considered replaceable on Wikipedia as surely there still exist knockoff products somewhere in the world. flickr gives us plenty to choose from, for example. B (talk) 23:19, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I support both deletion of these images and using the flickr pics as replacement. Whether it's decoration or evidence is not related to the matter. Kayau Voting IS evil 08:24, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]