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: relisted on 2017 December 12. FASTILY 04:37, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:SDP-Election-Poster-1932.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

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 the collage. ℯxplicit 00:25, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:LaurieStrode.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Paul730 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

File:LaurieStrode - Curtis & Taylor-Compton.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Wren Valmont (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Non-free screenshots being used in Laurie Strode. There's no need for two non-free screenshots of Jamie Curtis as Strode per WP:NFCC#3a. The question is whether the infobox image is acceptable per WP:NFCCP because it looks like a user-created montage which are not always permitted per WP:NFG.

So, if the collage is OK and can be sorted out per WP:NFCC#10a, then I suggest keep for "File:LaurieStrode - Curtis & Taylor-Compton.jpg" and delete "File:LaurieStrode.jpg". If the collage cannot be sorted, then it should be deleted; the other file could then be kept (assuming their are no other NFCCP problems) and moved to the main infobox. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:05, 1 November 2017 (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 F8 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 02:02, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:6 bonobos WHCalvin IMG 1341.JPG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Wcalvin (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This is a duplicate of file already on Wikimedia Commons Muzammil (talk) 14:53, 1 November 2017 (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⚡ 02:02, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Trafalgar Fountain.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scotwood72 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This file appears to have been copied from a website about Wascana Park, in which the fountain is located. Mindmatrix 17:09, 1 November 2017 (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⚡ 02:02, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Whole stuffed camel, unknown source, 2015.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Hop on Bananas (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

I don't think this photo has appropriate fair use rationale. The fact that there are few images of the dish does not mean that it is a unique historic image. The lack of free images knocking around doesn't mean we can just take someone else's. While the rationale states that it is "unknown" if the dish could be recreated, that is patently untrue. It is not claimed to contain any ingredients that are extinct or otherwise permanently unavailable. If we had access to a camel and some sheep, we could make one tomorrow. agtx 19:49, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nomination. his probably could've been tagged for speedy deletion using Template:Rfu because it seems to claerly fail WP:NFCC#1. For what its worth, however, there's no article content specifically about this particular image that seems to be the subject of critical commentary in reliable sources, so the context for non-free use required by WP:NFCC#8 is also lacking. A freely licensed equivalent image might not be currently available online, etc., but that does not mean that one cannot be created by someone, somewhere, someday. Without a reasonable explanation explaining why such an equivalent cannot be created as a representative photo of the dish and not just claiming "unknown", I cannot see how this would be an exception to WP:FREER. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:42, 1 November 2017 (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⚡ 02:02, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Morgan as The Gatekeeper.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by MJEH (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

The film screenshot is used in the "Career" section in Frank Morgan. There are already two free images from Commons used in the article, a younger picture also in the Career section and an older picture used in the infobox. The rationale for this image is "To illustrate article information." which does not make much sense or mean much of anything. The screenshot fails WP:NFCC#1 since the text "Morgan's best remembered film performance, playing five roles, is in The Wizard of Oz (1939), where he played the carnival huckster "Professor Marvel", the Gatekeeper at the Emerald City, the coachman of the carriage drawn by "The Horse of a Different Color", the Guard who initially refuses to let Dorothy and her friends in to see the Wizard, and the Wizard himself." is sufficient to describe what is in the screenshot without the screenshot being present, fails WP:NFCC#3a since he looks similar in the screenshot and the infobox image, and fails WP:NFCC#8 because there is no critical commentary about the screenshot thereby doing nothing to increase the reader's understanding of the topic and its exclusion is not detrimental to the understanding of the topic. Aspects (talk) 22:58, 1 November 2017 (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.