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: Kept but in just the main article only. - Peripitus (Talk) 06:17, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vodafone logo.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Samee (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

This seems to be used in unnecessarily many articles, see WP:NFC#UUI §17. Additionally, the file appears to violate WP:NFCC#9 in User:Romanisation/sandbox/Vodafone Roaming Services. Stefan2 (talk) 01:11, 13 January 2016 (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 as F5 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Michael Galeota.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jax 0677 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

File:Michael Galeota screenshot from Disney material.jpg (Galeota screenshot from Disney material.jpg%5D%5D delete | talk | history | links | Galeota screenshot from Disney material.jpg logs) – uploaded by George Ho (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Wireimage is an author of this image and asks a license to commercialize or promote this image. Although the subject is deceased, there are other fair use images not owned by news and photo agencies. George Ho (talk) 06:25, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I replaced this image with File:Michael Galeota screenshot from Disney material.jpg, a screenshot. --George Ho (talk) 06:40, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - File was originally taken from [1], but the source URL was changed after the fact. This is the most recent photo of Galeota that I was able to find. --Jax 0677 (talk) 13:40, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails WP:NFC#UUI §7. --Stefan2 (talk) 13:42, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - File:Michael Galeota screenshot from Disney material.jpg is not free either, placing us in the same situation as this file. If there is a decent free up to date photo available, I will gladly support this file being deleted. BTW, what SPECIFIC part of WP:NFC#UUI does this photo violate? Adding File:Michael Galeota screenshot from Disney material.jpg to list of files to be discussed. --Jax 0677 (talk) 13:50, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • A specific part which is violated is the specific part which was stated above. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:37, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      • Reply - Los Angeles Times is a paid daily newspaper, not a an organization that gathers news reports and sells them to subscribing news organizations nor a supplier of photographs, which are often licensed for specific uses. --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:50, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
        • The link in the fair use rationale points at Wireimage. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:03, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
          • Reply - Now it points to [2]. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:17, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
            • WP:NFC#UUI §7 is not dependent on which source the file information page happens to list. Replacing the source on the file information page with a different source doesn't affect whether a file is to be deleted for this reason. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:39, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Reply - If Los Angeles Times is a paid daily newspaper, not a an organization that gathers news reports and sells them to subscribing news organizations nor a supplier of photographs, which are often licensed for specific uses, how can this photo violate WP:NFC#UUI §7? --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:07, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Copies of the picture are sold by Wireimage, as evidenced for example by the image caption in the newspaper and by the link to Wireimage which was previously present on the file information page. The file therefore fails WP:NFC#UUI §7. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:24, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Reply - OK, I just replaced the picture with File:Michael Galeota 002.jpg. --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:41, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• The screenshot file is irrelevant to the rationale that I made about the other image owned by the photo press agency. Therefore, I struck it out rather than remove it as I did before. The screenshot image should be discussed at the newest date with a different rationale unrelated to this discussion. George Ho (talk) 04:34, 16 January 2016 (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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:05, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Laff Box02.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Oanabay04 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

This image probably fails WP:NFCC#1 since photos released with a free license of this device can most likely still be created, unless all of these devices have been destroyed (which I doubt since this photo was probably taken in 2012.) Steel1943 (talk) 07:41, 13 January 2016 (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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:05, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mackenzie 5 channel repeater HBUse.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Oanabay04 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Most likely fails WP:NFCC#1 since there are most likely still machines, such as this one, that are still intact, allowing someone to take a photo of the device and releasing it with a free license. Steel1943 (talk) 07:49, 13 January 2016 (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: Kept for the bio article only. Per past discussions non-free images for deceased people often are kept, particularly where they are not widely photographed. Image removed from the other article. Now if someone could please find a free images ? - Peripitus (Talk) 11:02, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Carroll Pratt 19102009.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Oanabay04 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

I think this file may fail WP:NFCC#8 with its usage in Laugh track. However, I am not completely sure since the photo is of Carroll Pratt using a laugh track, which is what the photo illustrates and is what the section is about, but I am not sure if it actually adds enough to the section to fulfill WP:NFCC#8 or warrant the use of a non-free file. Steel1943 (talk) 08:03, 13 January 2016 (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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:05, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fire Safety Certificate.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Anfield2012 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

The image seems to vague to meet WP:NFCC#8 anywhere in Fire Safety Certificate. Also, the file also probably fails WP:NFCC#1 as replaceable. Steel1943 (talk) 08:26, 13 January 2016 (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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:05, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:"Shelter From the Norm" LP by Tim Ware Group - 1983.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scribblerman (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Fails WP:NFCC#8 since the article is about the album's artist, not the album itself. Steel1943 (talk) 18:59, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Succeeds because the article is about the artist and his work, and the cover illustrates some of the work. The artist didn't feel it was necessary to add a new Wikipedia page for each album, and that readers of the article would appreciate some pictures to accompany the artist's Wikipedia entry. There is no harm being done here, and the cover art is certainly relevant to the artist's work Scribblerman (talk) 19:10, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Per WP:NFC#cite_note-2, the cover art is only to be included in the article about the product but not in the article about the person who created the product. --Stefan2 (talk) 19:20, 13 January 2016 (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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:05, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Michael Galeota 002.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Jax 0677 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

This image is not appropriate as infobox image. It is a 31-year-old (i.e. adult) body of Michael Galeota. The image of him as a child or teenager is more encyclopedic and recognizable than the image of him as 30-something man. This is George Ho actually (Talk) 22:32, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - I have added the photo as an addition to the page to show what he looked like more recently as an adult. A discussion took place as to avoiding the portrayal of Travon Martin as a kid or thug. --Jax 0677 (talk) 19:01, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An image of him as an adult isn't necessary. If so, we should include descriptions of his adult physique. Otherwise, the image is just showing off. --George Ho (talk) 07:05, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. At this moment, this file is outside the infobox in this article, which causes this file to fail WP:NFCC#3 as excessive use of non-free material. If this file is put into the infobox and replaces the current photo in the infobox, then I'm actually neutral on this since I really don't have an opinion on what photo should be used in the infobox. Steel1943 (talk) 15:34, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Steel1943: Look at the article. He hasn't been in a movie or TV since 2003. Which is more appropriate, the image of him in his 30s or as a child/teenager? George Ho (talk) 08:08, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have no opinion in the matter, given I am not familiar with the subject. If I'd have to take an educated guess in what photograph would be better used in the article based on what I understand about the subject by reading their article, I would say that the better option would be to have a photograph of the subject in their younger years ... since that seems to be the period of time which they were most notable. Steel1943 (talk) 13:55, 22 January 2016 (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.