< May 29	May 31 >

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 Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:04, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image appears to fail some of the criteria laid out at Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria:

It fails criterion 4 because this particular screenshot has not been published outside Wikipedia. (Is it possible that I don't understand this criterion and that original screenshots are permitted because the software has already been distributed outside Wikipedia?)
I personally believe that it fails criterion 8 because it is not, in my opinion, crucial to the understanding of the text in the Indigo Wireless article.
It fails criterion 10 because it doesn't have a separate fair use rationale for its use in the Indigo Wireless article. This usually could be easily remedied, but I'm not sure it would be possible to make a strong rationale seeing as though the image lacks contextual significance in the article (again, in my eyes, perhaps not in anyone else's).

In conclusion, I think that there might be a case for deletion. Thoughts? Chris the Paleontologist (talk • contribs) 00:20, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't seem to meet fair use criteria. Used only in articles that are at AFD. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:10, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep you are wrong it's used on In Consequence too and the AFD article you are reffered too is wrongfully pointed as one... and the discussion is open... please stop the spiteful attacks on my condributions — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asouko (talk • contribs) 01:35, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:04, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Indian stamps are copyright for 60 years per commons:Commons:Stamps/Public domain templates and non-free stamps are not permitted in Gallery. Also there is no critical commentary about this 2006 stamp, so fails WP:NFC#Images #3, WP:NFG and WP:NFCC#8. There is also no evidence the image used is freely licenced. ww2censor (talk) 03:07, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:04, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This 2008 stamps is copyright for 50 years per commons:Commons:Stamps/Public domain templates {former UK colony}. The image fails WP:NFC#Images #3 and WP:NFCC#8. There is no commentary of any kind but is used as decoration in Caliphate. The 2nd use has no WP:FURG. ww2censor (talk) 03:14, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Non-free images are not allowed in galleries per WP:NFG and the image is completely missing any critical commentary, so cannot pass WP:NFCC#8. Perhaps it can be integrated into the prose with suitably sourced prose with a suitable "purpose of use" justifying its inclusion. ww2censor (talk) 03:23, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The uploader has now changed the image to PD-India claiming he is dead and the image is more than 50 year old. However, there is no evidence this image was taken more than 50 years ago and to comply with Indian copyright law it must be more than 60 years old and, even if it, was it may still be in copyright in the US. The subject would need to be less than 32 years of age for the licence to be correct. There is no telling; he could well be older in this image. Absolutely no evidence has been provided. ww2censor (talk) 15:55, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have absolutely no clue when this image was taken. I scanned it from a book which is copyrighted, but since the author (Sivaji Ganesan) is dead, I thought the image was free. Kailash29792 (talk) 16:27, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

- The ((PD-India)) template applied by the uploader clearly states that photographs must be more than 60 year old to be copyright free. Unfortunately we don't know it it is older or newer. We need to err on the side of caution. ww2censor (talk) 16:37, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. PD-India requires publication before 1941. Also no NFC justification. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:07, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No evidence that it was published before 1941. --Stefan2 (talk) 19:55, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok fine delete it. But isn't there anything I can do to let the image stay? The author is dead, so I can't get permission from him! Guess I'll have to try uploading it from Wikimedia Commons... Kailash29792 (talk) 02:48, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No there is nothing you can do without verification. I, and other, have explained that without verification of the copyright status we cannot use the image and the same applies on the commons, so please don't upload them there. BTW I see you have had problems with the status of images there too. ww2censor (talk) 04:08, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In order to keep the photo, you have to prove that it was published in India before 1941. No such evidence has been presented. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:31, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead, delete it. The photo was published in the 50's or 60's for sure. Kailash29792 (talk) 12:57, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Non-free images are not allowed in galleries per WP:NFG and the image is completely missing any critical commentary, so cannot pass WP:NFCC#8. Perhaps it can be integrated into the prose with suitably sourced prose with a suitable "purpose of use" justifying its inclusion. ww2censor (talk) 03:28, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The uploader has now changed the image to PD-India claiming he is dead (which is true). However, there is no evidence this image was taken more than 60 years ago to comply with Indian copyright law and, even if it, was it may still be in copyright in the US. There is no telling when this image was taken which could be any time before his acting career finished which is stated to be 2002. Absolutely no evidence has been provided. ww2censor (talk) 16:01, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence: http://photos.mid-day.com/specials/the-legendary-gemini-ganesan/gemini-ganesan-phone/ is where I got the image from, and the site says "undated". It is most likely in 1948, where I heard he played the Hindu god Lord Krishna in a film named Chakradhari. He is incidentally dressed as the same character. read more here Kailash29792 (talk) 16:19, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. ww2censor! If you want the post to stay, then reply to my comment! Surrender, because the image is free as it was taken before 1952 (before Gemini became a star)! Though the site says undated, it clearly shows that they've not been able to trace the image's date! It's that old. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:46, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. In order to substantiate a PD-India claim, we would need proof not that it was made before 1952, but that it was made and published before 1941 (after that date it might be in the PD in India, but not yet in the US). Judging from the Lord Krishna costume he's wearing, this photo would probably be from the production of a movie called Chakradhari, of 1948, where he played such a role, but that's not early enough. Moreover, we don't have any evidence about the date of publication. Also delete on NFCC#8 grounds, per the original nomination, if the claim should be reverted to one of fair use. To Kailash: if you attempt to remove this nomination once more, you will be blocked. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:56, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sir what else can I do so that the image stays? No-one knows when it was published! It's not my mistake! Kailash29792 (talk) 03:32, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since it certainly wasn't published before 1941, you really can't do anything. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:46, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. The actor made his debut only in 1947, so I think I'll have to sacrifice this image. But the image still appears free, as the source has not copyrighted it. Kailash29792 (talk) 07:18, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kailash29792 based on your last post, it appear that you really don't understand copyright very well. The source website gives no information about the image's copyright status but that has absolutely no bearing on whether the image is copyright or not. You could copy a current copyright photo from a newspaper, place it on your website with no copyright information but that does not mean there is no existing copyright; that depend on who took the image and when and where it was taken. Lack of information does not prove an image is freely licenced, only verifiable information proving its copyright status is acceptable information. As I already told you, ee err on the side of caution. ww2censor (talk) 15:21, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:04, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This 2010 Swiss stamp is normally copyright for 70 years per commons:Commons:L#Switzerland. The image fails WP:NFC#Images #3 and WP:NFCC#8. There is no commentary of any kind and is used as decoration in the biography of Heinrich Sutermeister that already shows a image of the subject. ww2censor (talk) 03:39, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This 1999 Indian stamp is copyright for 60 years per commons:Commons:Stamps/Public domain templates. The image fails WP:NFC#Images #3 and WP:NFCC#8. The fact that a stamp was issued to memorialise the subject is already well explained in the prose, so it is used as decoration in Veerapandiya Kattabomman that already shows an image of the subject. ww2censor (talk) 03:49, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This 1980 Indian stamp is copyright for 60 years per commons:Commons:Stamps/Public domain templates. The image fails WP:NFC#Images #3 WP:NFCC#1 as well as WP:NFCC#8. The fact that a stamp was issued to memorialise the subject could be well explained in the prose, but is used as decoration the infobox of Madras Engineer Group when there are freely licenced images in the arfticle that could be used in the infobox instead. There is no need for this non-free image. ww2censor (talk) 03:57, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free photograph showing two politicians together. Obvious NFCC#8 failure (we don't need to see a photo of this scene to understand that the two appeared together on some event, and the event isn't even mentioned in the article otherwise.) False tag and boilerplate FUR claiming that the image is a "screenshot used for critical commentary on the video" in question, which is patently false (it's a screenshot, but not being used for such a purpose). This means it also falls under CSD F7 for immediate speedy ("clearly invalid tag"). Was correctly marked as such, but tag was inexplicably removed by two admins. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:08, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Photograph of a deceased politician. While the use of some non-free image may be justified here (depending on whether free alternatives exist, which isn't too unlikely though), the use of this particular item is problematic on NFCC#2 grounds. This is a high-profile piece of photographic portrait art, by a prominent professional journalist, and kept as such in the National Galleries of Scotland [1]. There must be alternatives where less potential commercial interest is at stake than here. Note that it was also uploaded with only a random website given as a source, without due investigation of authorship and copyright. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:33, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:33, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:33, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:34, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Low quality (cut off), unclear encyclopedic value Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:34, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:35, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:35, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Low quality Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:35, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:39, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:31, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:31, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, dubious own work Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:33, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:33, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic (both versions), possible copyvio (current version) Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:33, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:34, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, no stated source, web-resolution, no metadata, dubious own work given uploader's other uploads Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:35, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons. Please nominate it for deletion there if you still feel it should be deleted. AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:10, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Created to illustrate (now deleted)hoax page TheLongTone (talk) 18:09, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

May 30

File:Indigo Wireless Roaming Example.jpg

File:Phase Perdition.ogg

File:Gemini ganesan stamp.jpg

File:Ghana Khilafat Ahmadiyya Stamp 2008.jpg

File:Sivaji Gemini Sport.jpg

File:Gemini-ganesan-phone.jpg

File:Heinrich Sutermeister Stamp.jpg

File:Kattabomman-Stamp.jpg

File:Madras Sappers Stamp.jpg

File:Hon. Samia Nkrumah and Romano Prodi speaking to Parliament of Italy 2011-11-22-..jpg

File:John Smith MP Labour (UK) Leader.jpg

File:Yeshiva3.jpg

File:Bar3.jpg

File:Bar Ilan.jpg

File:Yesiltepe1 Necon5000.jpg

File:Yeti 1953, Sir Edmund Hillary.jpg

File:YetzirahWiki.gif

File:Yeux099.JPG

File:YEVAK.jpg

File:EarlYevak2.jpg

File:Earl Yevak.jpg

File:Greenfields city hall.jpg

File:Beyond the box.jpg

File:Yfc.gif

File:The Official Logo of Spummer.png

File:Greenfileds city 2.png

File:The Patch Design of The Bull Brahmas Motorcycle Club.jpg