Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2013 April 22

< April 21	April 23 >

April 22

File:Start-class.svg

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, a red arrow pointing right, no forseeable use. B (talk) 02:31, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Commons; a basic red arrow can be used for loads of things. Nyttend (talk) 16:10, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- What would you possibly use this red arrow for? If you look at the image, the arrow head is off center from the shaft. What possible reason could we have to use a bad drawing of a red arrow? --B (talk) 12:38, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment if it is moved to commons, it should use a different name, since it isn't the start-class icon. -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 20:20, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Should be text: →. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:19, 29 April 2013 (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.

File:Philip head.jpg

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:03, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, unencyclopedic B (talk) 03:25, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

delete Self-pic of a user who quit the project years ago. Mangoe (talk) 12:28, 22 April 2013 (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.

File:Philip cat.jpg

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 F9 by Nyttend (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:04, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, unencyclopedic. I'm not sure where the blank comes from, but I know that the cat on the right is from the Every time you masturbate... God kills a kitten meme, so unless the underlying photo (minus the domo-kuns) of the cat is free, this is a derivative work of a copyrighted picture. B (talk) 03:29, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted as copyvio. The background scene is a nonfree standard Windows wallpaper, which I used for several years. Nyttend (talk) 20:18, 24 April 2013 (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.

File:Stephencrown160.jpg

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, too small to be of encyclopedic use. I have no idea who this person is, but even if we had an article on him, the licensing is dubious. B (talk) 03:32, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

delete was never used so no idea what it was for. Mangoe (talk) 12:26, 22 April 2013 (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.

File:Waratahs Brumbies.jpg

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, a retouched version of File:Brumbies vs Waratahs.JPG.jpg, but the original is overwhelmingly better. B (talk) 03:34, 22 April 2013 (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.

File:Sydney rugby.jpg

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned. The image this one claims to be a derivative work of is not what it comes from. So we have no idea if the license is legitimate. B (talk) 03:35, 22 April 2013 (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.

File:The shroud 2.jpg

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, uploaded for deleted non-notable band. Even if we had an article on the band, the photo is of too poor quality to be especially useful. B (talk) 03:45, 22 April 2013 (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.

File:"Do the Bartman" music video screenshot.jpg

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 - redundant for identification of both the music and the dance; the infobox image already meets both of those needs. (ESkog)^(Talk) 13:39, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image is used for decoration, rather than an informative use, violating WP:NFCC —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:57, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Complies with WP:NFCC. This still serves to illustrate critical commentary on the music video and depicts the choreography of the Bartman dance, both of which are described in the music video section. Per WP:NFCC#8, the omission of this image would be detrimental to readers' understanding of the topic. Gobōnobō ⁺ ^c 21:05, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I can't find any discussion about the image in that section. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:21, 29 April 2013 (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.

File:Child Sacrifice.jpg

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free media in contravention of WP:NFCC: usage does not greatly enhance understanding but merely provides decoration. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:25, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as non-free media that doesn't pass WP:NFCCP #8. Themes in Torchwood will be perfectly understandable without that image. ALH (talk) 10:23, 28 April 2013 (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.

File:Imazaquin Copyrighted.png

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The chemical structure is incorrect. The tert-butyl group should be an isopropyl group. ChemNerd (talk) 12:45, 22 April 2013 (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.

File:Dualtium.jpg

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unused image, lacking a description, image does not assert notability of it's subject. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:12, 22 April 2013 (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.

File:Dutchband.jpg

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unused image lacking description, Image does not assert notability of it's subject. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:21, 22 April 2013 (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.

File:Money-raised.jpg

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unused chart, Lacking description or context, Image doesn't assert the notability of the data it presents. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:37, 22 April 2013 (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.

File:ChadalavadaSundararamaSastri.jpg

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First tagged as {{cc-by-sa}} and then up for deletion due to lack of permission. Then changed to {{non-free biog-pic}}, but there is no evidence that the photo satisfies WP:NFCC#4. If published during the lifetime of the person, then it is PD, but there is no evidence that the photo has been published. Stefan2 (talk) 13:41, 22 April 2013 (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.

File:DrakeB&W-Tza.jpg

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unused image lacking description of context, image does not assert notability of its subject. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:41, 22 April 2013 (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.

File:1995 Scottish Challenge Cup Final programme cover.jpg

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 all. Usage violates NFCC#8, as confirmed by discussion now at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 59#Promotional event posters as identification. – Quadell ^(talk) 11:51, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The fair use rationale is faulty. It says that the purpose of use in the article is "to serve as the primary means of visual identification at the top of the article dedicated to the work in question." However, the uploader hasn't explained in what way a match programme cover would be useful for anyone to identify a sports event. Normally, you would just identify such events by giving the name and date of the event. Stefan2 (talk) 14:03, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Same uploader & same problem:

Comment: I see your point. Perhaps the use rationale should be changed to something like this here? Thanks, Cal Umbra 14:52, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The problem is that no one uses them for identification, so the images violate WP:NFCC#8. --Stefan2 (talk) 16:20, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Some people may identify the event by the two football clubs participating in the final and not necessarily by the date of the event. The image therefore provides a clear visual representation of the teams in question. It also provides a summary of the details of the event being an official match programme cover. It also appears to be quite customary for other Wikipedia articles of similar events to include the match programme cover as a means of visual identification for example: here, here and here, which if is the case would also violate the policy you mentioned and should be considered for deletion. Thanks, Cal Umbra 16:54, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The football clubs are best described by including their names. Also see WP:NFC#UUI §6: if the football clubs have Wikipedia articles, it is enough to link to those articles. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:22, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If there is no compromise to the inclusion of these images in relation to the articles then I'll accept it. However, this problem with programme covers representing similar articles is a lot more widespread, as with the examples I provided above. Cal Umbra 21:43, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - to my mind the use of a programme cover is equivalent to the use of something like File:Super Bowl XLIII logo.svg. As big football finals don't have specific logos like the Super Bowls do, the programme is the nearest equivalent. Just my 2 cents...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:33, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The difference is that a logo commonly is used for identification of something whereas a programme cover is not. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:56, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - It is in football. The UEFA Champions League has an annual unveiling of the visual identity for that year's Champions League final, and since the match programme is the element of that visual identity that people will see more than anything else, it stands to reason that the programme should be used on Wikipedia as the primary visual identifier of a match. And since that applies to the Champions League, I think that should apply to all competitions, including the Scottish Cup. – Pee Jay 17:48, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion should probably remain open until the discussion at WT:NFC#Promotional event posters as identification has ended. --Stefan2 (talk) 18:54, 9 June 2013 (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.

File:Prisonercellblockhcomplete.jpg

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really see why a box of DVDs would help understanding a list of episodes. This obviously violates WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 14:11, 22 April 2013 (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.

File:Cuckoo clock in Twin Peaks.png

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 14:24, 22 April 2013 (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.

File:Cuckoo clock in Bunny Lake is Missing.png

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 14:24, 22 April 2013 (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.

File:Neondian1995cover.jpeg

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant to File:Neondian1985cover.jpeg, see WP:NFCC#3a. Stefan2 (talk) 14:52, 22 April 2013 (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.

File:Neondian2006cover.jpeg

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8, see File:Neondian1985cover.jpeg. Stefan2 (talk) 14:52, 22 April 2013 (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.

File:Jack Whicher 1858.jpg

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 G7 by Nyttend (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:04, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Misidentified image—the person shown is actually William Saville-Kent per the image in that article and in the National Library of Australia, of which this is obviously a derivative and to which it's redundant. (An actual image of Whicher can be seen in the Amazon "Look Inside" view of this book, facing page 304.) Deor (talk) 15:42, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oops - so it is. Please delete and I will upload the correct image. Thanks. Jack1956 (talk) 20:31, 22 April 2013 (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.

File:Omotola, Own Up, Pay Up, Clean Up Niger Delta.jpg

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#3b and WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 16:44, 22 April 2013 (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.

File:Front Cover Crystal Maze CYOAB.JPG

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. (ESkog)^(Talk) 13:42, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#8: not critically discussed. Stefan2 (talk) 18:28, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion never disputed by me, go ahead and delete. Cmch83 (talk) 00:53, 16 May 2013 (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.

File:The Best of The Crystal Maze.jpg

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. (ESkog)^(Talk) 20:32, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#8: not critically discussed. Stefan2 (talk) 18:29, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion never disputed by me, go ahead and delete. Cmch83 (talk) 00:53, 16 May 2013 (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.

File:Promotional photo of Richard O'Brien hosting The Crystal Maze.jpg

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. A discussion between two editors on an article talk page is not "consensus" - and even if it were, they would be trumped by the policy concerns raised here. (ESkog)^(Talk) 20:34, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#1: essentially just a non-free photo of Richard O'Brien. Stefan2 (talk) 20:21, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Which part of 'fair use' don't you understand?? This photo was distributed freely as promo to UK media in the early 1990s. Cmch83 (talk) 20:31, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The fact that something was distributed freely doesn't automatically mean that it meets the non-free content criteria, though. This image has no chance of meeting them. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:33, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Kindly explain why not. I'm not as experienced as all that as a Wikipedia editor, and I've put a lot of work into this in very good faith. Are you trying to delete all my work for a serious reason or just for the fun of it? Where on earth do you expect to find a "free" photo of Richard O'Brien presenting a TV show from the early 1990s?? Who on earth suffers from the use of an old press photo which I specifically remember seeing in TV listings at the time? Cmch83 (talk) 23:14, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Disagree specifically because of the clause in WP:NFCC#1 that "for retired individuals whose notability rests in large part on their earlier visual appearance, a new picture may not serve the same purpose as an image taken during their career, in which case the use would be acceptable." The text of the article notes the significance of O'Brien's striking visual appearance in the show. Cmch83 (talk) 23:31, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - He doesn't look a lot older in File:Richard O Brien by Stuart Mentiply.jpg, so that argument doesn't hold here. Anyway, per WP:NFC#UUI §6, it is enough to link to the article about him, where he should be identified. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:24, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - There is now a consensus on the talk page that this image is to stay, but the Ed Tudor-Pole image can be deleted. Please unmark for deletion. Cmch83 (talk) 00:53, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        Why is there a duplicate discussion on the article talk page and why wasn't anyone informed of that discussion in the deletion discussion? --Stefan2 (talk) 00:36, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        I'm a fairly inexperienced editor and I've acted in good faith at all times, and I don't feel that you're being very nice to me. I started a discussion on the article's talk page because I feel it's the best place to discuss it, where (a) everyone who is watching the article can see and (b) the image needs of the whole article can be discussed more holistically. You're getting most of the deletions you wanted anyway. Why is this a problem? Cmch83 (talk) 02:25, 17 May 2013 (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.

File:Crystal Maze Series 3.jpg

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: Keep as the other identifier in the infobox was deleted. (ESkog)^(Talk) 20:35, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFLISTS and WP:NFCC#3a. No need for two images in the infobox, and there's already File:Crystal Maze Series 1.jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 20:34, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree: This is a pretty ridiculous deletion request. We're talking about the show's main graphic identity here. There were two of them, not a long list, therefore WP:NFLISTS is hardly relevant. The effect of this deletion would be to remove from the entry the show's main graphic identity for the last two-thirds (four whole seasons) of its run - that's going way beyond "minimal use" principles into over-zealous trashing. Cmch83 (talk) 23:39, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- If a company has two logos, then the article would normally only contain one of those. I see that the other logo has been removed, though. One of the images can be kept in the article, irrelevant which of them. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:26, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Fine, but it's the one you marked for deletion which is to stay. Please unmark accordingly. Cmch83 (talk) 00:53, 16 May 2013 (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.

File:The Crystal Maze's Aztec Zone.jpg

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; in addition to the discussion below the image has been orphaned as a result of a discussion elsewhere. (ESkog)^(Talk) 20:37, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFLISTS and WP:NFCC#8: not discussed critically. Stefan2 (talk) 20:36, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree: The Crystal Maze's four "zones" were absolutely central to the show's renowned visual appeal, and therefore one small image of each zone is 'contextually significant' under WP:NFCC#8. WP:NFLISTS allows judicious use to "present the key visual aspects of the topic", "restricting such uses to major... elements" - this is clearly followed and therefore there is no violation here either. The four images of the zones could probably be presented in the article much better than they are right now, but deletion of the images is not the answer to this. Cmch83 (talk) 23:46, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- However, per WP:NFLISTS you can't illustrate all of them, and there is zero critical discussion about what the zones look like, so they violate WP:NFCC#8. Looks just like any random TV episode infobox image, and such images get deleted per WP:NFCC#8 all of the time. Also, if the purpose is to display Aztec things, then the image can be replaced by a freely licensed image of real Aztec things. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:31, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - There's now a consensus on the article's talk page that this image can be removed, but the Medieval Zone image is to stay. Go ahead with deletion. Cmch83 (talk) 00:53, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Why is there a duplicate discussion on the article talk page and why wasn't anyone informed of that discussion in the deletion discussion? --Stefan2 (talk) 00:35, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - I'm a fairly inexperienced editor and I've acted in good faith at all times, and I don't feel that you're being very nice to me. I started a discussion on the article's talk page because I feel it's the best place to discuss it, where (a) everyone who is watching the article can see and (b) the image needs of the whole article can be discussed more holistically. You're getting most of the deletions you wanted anyway. Why is this a problem? Cmch83 (talk) 02:25, 17 May 2013 (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.

File:The Crystal Maze's Industrial Zone.jpg

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 as above. (ESkog)^(Talk) 20:38, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFLISTS and WP:NFCC#8: not discussed critically. Stefan2 (talk) 20:36, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree: The Crystal Maze's four "zones" were absolutely central to the show's renowned visual appeal, and therefore one small image of each zone is 'contextually significant' under WP:NFCC#8. WP:NFLISTS allows judicious use to "present the key visual aspects of the topic", "restricting such uses to major... elements" - this is clearly followed and therefore there is no violation here either. The four images of the zones could probably be presented in the article much better than they are right now, but deletion of the images is not the answer to this. Cmch83 (talk) 23:46, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Er, no. WP:NFCC#8 allows one image of the show, not one image of multiple parts of the show, unless there is critical discussion about the additional images. This is exactly why screenshots of TV series episodes get deleted all of the time. --Stefan2 (talk) 12:56, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - There's now a consensus on the article's talk page that this image can be removed, but the Medieval Zone image is to stay. Go ahead with deletion. Cmch83 (talk) 00:53, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Why is there a duplicate discussion on the article talk page and why wasn't anyone informed of that discussion in the deletion discussion? --Stefan2 (talk) 00:35, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - I'm a fairly inexperienced editor and I've acted in good faith at all times, and I don't feel that you're being very nice to me. I started a discussion on the article's talk page because I feel it's the best place to discuss it, where (a) everyone who is watching the article can see and (b) the image needs of the whole article can be discussed more holistically. You're getting most of the deletions you wanted anyway. Why is this a problem? Cmch83 (talk) 02:25, 17 May 2013 (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.

File:The Crystal Maze's Medieval Zone.jpg

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; no critical discussion, merely a description of the items in the room (which furthers the argument that this is replaceable by text). (ESkog)^(Talk) 20:41, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFLISTS and WP:NFCC#8: not discussed critically. Stefan2 (talk) 20:36, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree: The Crystal Maze's four "zones" were absolutely central to the show's renowned visual appeal, and therefore one small image of each zone is 'contextually significant' under WP:NFCC#8. WP:NFLISTS allows judicious use to "present the key visual aspects of the topic", "restricting such uses to major... elements" - this is clearly followed and therefore there is no violation here either. The four images of the zones could probably be presented in the article much better than they are right now, but deletion of the images is not the answer to this. Cmch83 (talk) 23:47, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- However, per WP:NFLISTS you can't illustrate all of them, and there is zero critical discussion about what the zones look like (there is just a brief mention of what they look like), so they violate WP:NFCC#8. Looks just like any random TV episode infobox image, and such images get deleted per WP:NFCC#8 all of the time. Also, if the purpose is to display a mediæval castle, then the image can be replaced by an image of a similar real mediæval castle. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:33, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Disagree: This, along with the other purging of photos on this page appear to merely be Stefan2 flexing his muscles. There is nothing out of place, or offensive about the photos, I would argue that as there is no critical discussion of what they look like, photographic examples provide extra-textual information, improving the quality of the article. Just my tuppenc'worth. 86.174.153.158 (talk) 12:22, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Er, no, lack of critical discussion is absolutely no reason to include a non-free image. On the contrary, lack of critical discussion is a standard reason to exclude non-free images. Also, you seem to suggest that it would be possible to get the same understanding by simply adding certain text to the article. If that is the case, then the image violates WP:NFCC#1 (replaceable by text). --Stefan2 (talk) 12:51, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - There's now a consensus on the article's talk page that this image is to stay but the other three zone images are to be removed. Please unmark this image for deletion. Cmch83 (talk) 00:53, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        Why is there a duplicate discussion on the article talk page and why wasn't anyone informed of that discussion in the deletion discussion? --Stefan2 (talk) 00:34, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        I'm a fairly inexperienced editor and I've acted in good faith at all times, and I don't feel that you're being very nice to me. I started a discussion on the article's talk page because I feel it's the best place to discuss it, where (a) everyone who is watching the article can see and (b) the image needs of the whole article can be discussed more holistically. You're getting most of the deletions you wanted anyway. Why is this a problem? Cmch83 (talk) 02:25, 17 May 2013 (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.

File:The Crystal Maze's Futuristic Zone.jpg

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. (ESkog)^(Talk) 20:41, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFLISTS and WP:NFCC#8: not discussed critically. Stefan2 (talk) 20:37, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree: The Crystal Maze's four "zones" were absolutely central to the show's renowned visual appeal, and therefore one small image of each zone is 'contextually significant' under WP:NFCC#8. WP:NFLISTS allows judicious use to "present the key visual aspects of the topic", "restricting such uses to major... elements" - this is clearly followed and therefore there is no violation here either. The four images of the zones could probably be presented in the article much better than they are right now, but deletion of the images is not the answer to this. Cmch83 (talk) 23:47, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- However, per WP:NFLISTS you can't illustrate all of them, and there is zero sourced critical discussion about what the zones look like (it's just mentioned briefly), so they violate WP:NFCC#8. Looks just like any random TV episode infobox image, and such images get deleted per WP:NFCC#8 all of the time. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:34, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - There's now a consensus on the article's talk page that this image can be removed, but the Medieval Zone image is to stay. Go ahead with deletion. Cmch83 (talk) 00:53, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Why is there a duplicate discussion on the article talk page and why wasn't anyone informed of that discussion in the deletion discussion? --Stefan2 (talk) 00:34, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - I'm a fairly inexperienced editor and I've acted in good faith at all times, and I don't feel that you're being very nice to me. I started a discussion on the article's talk page because I feel it's the best place to discuss it, where (a) everyone who is watching the article can see and (b) the image needs of the whole article can be discussed more holistically. You're getting most of the deletions you wanted anyway. Why is this a problem? Cmch83 (talk) 02:25, 17 May 2013 (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.

File:Target shooting game on The Crystal Maze.jpg

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 - replaceable by the existing text in the article. (ESkog)^(Talk) 20:48, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFLISTS and WP:NFCC#8: not needed for understanding the article. Stefan2 (talk) 20:43, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree: The use of only two illustrative photos in a longish list of game types does not violate WP:NFLISTS. And it makes little sense to argue that no images at all of gameplay are needed to assist understanding of a highly visual TV game show. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmch83 (talk • contribs) 23:21, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- However, per WP:NFLISTS, you can't illustrate all of the games, and this game can easily be understood by instead using one of the freely licensed images in Commons:Category:Diagrams of targets. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:39, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - There's now a consensus on the article's talk page that this image is to stay but the sliding puzzle image is to be removed. Please unmark for deletion Cmch83 (talk) 00:53, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Why is there a duplicate discussion on the article talk page and why wasn't anyone informed of that discussion in the deletion discussion? --Stefan2 (talk) 00:35, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - I'm a fairly inexperienced editor and I've acted in good faith at all times, and I don't feel that you're being very nice to me. I started a discussion on the article's talk page because I feel it's the best place to discuss it, where (a) everyone who is watching the article can see and (b) the image needs of the whole article can be discussed more holistically. You're getting most of the deletions you wanted anyway. Why is this a problem? Cmch83 (talk) 02:25, 17 May 2013 (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.

File:Sliding puzzle game on The Crystal Maze.jpg

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. (ESkog)^(Talk) 20:49, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFLISTS and WP:NFCC#8: not needed for understanding the article. Stefan2 (talk) 20:44, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree: The use of only two illustrative photos in a longish list of game types does not violate WP:NFLISTS. And it makes little sense to argue that no images at all of gameplay are needed to assist understanding of a highly visual TV game show. Cmch83 (talk) 23:23, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Per WP:NFCC#8, you can only include a non-free image if the inclusion increases the understanding of the article. In this case, inclusion of the image decreases the understanding, though. You see a man standing in front of a table, but you can't really see what he's doing, so you just become puzzled about what strange thing he's up to. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:42, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - There's now a consensus on the article's talk page that this image can be removed, but the target shooting game image is to stay. Go ahead with deletion. Cmch83 (talk) 00:53, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Why is there a duplicate discussion on the article talk page and why wasn't anyone informed of that discussion in the deletion discussion? --Stefan2 (talk) 00:34, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - I'm a fairly inexperienced editor and I've acted in good faith at all times, and I don't feel that you're being very nice to me. I started a discussion on the article's talk page because I feel it's the best place to discuss it, where (a) everyone who is watching the article can see and (b) the image needs of the whole article can be discussed more holistically. You're getting most of the deletions you wanted anyway. Why is this a problem? Cmch83 (talk) 02:25, 17 May 2013 (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.

File:Ed Tudor-Pole introducing an episode of The Crystal Maze.png

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. (ESkog)^(Talk) 20:49, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC#1 and WP:NFC#UUI §6: essentially just a non-free photo of Edward Tudor-Pole. Stefan2 (talk) 20:45, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree: WP:NFCC#1 is clearly not violated because "taking a new free picture as a replacement" would NOT "serve the same encyclopedic purpose as the non-free image". WP:NFC#UUI is not clearly violated either, because it's not just a photo of Ed Tudor-Pole, it's a photo of Ed Tudor-Pole presenting The Crystal Maze AND it illustrates text about his outfit on the show. Considering Tudor-Pole is a musician who has made it clear he considered his hosting of The Crystal Maze to be a sideline, this photo does not more correctly belong in his own entry. Cmch83 (talk) 23:29, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- A photo of Edward Tudor-Pole is always a photo of Edward Tudor-Pole, and there is zero critical discussion of his outfit in the show, so the outfit violates WP:NFCC#8. Compare with screenshots from music videos which show the artist's outfit in the music video. Such screenshots are frequently deleted because of there being zero discussion about the outfit or about the screenshot. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:45, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - There's now a consensus on the article's talk page that this image can be removed, but the Richard O'Brien image is to stay. Go ahead with deletion. Cmch83 (talk) 00:53, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Why is there a duplicate discussion on the article talk page and why wasn't anyone informed of that discussion in the deletion discussion? --Stefan2 (talk) 00:34, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - I'm a fairly inexperienced editor and I've acted in good faith at all times, and I don't feel that you're being very nice to me. I started a discussion on the article's talk page because I feel it's the best place to discuss it, where (a) everyone who is watching the article can see and (b) the image needs of the whole article can be discussed more holistically. You're getting most of the deletions you wanted anyway. Why is this a problem? Cmch83 (talk) 02:25, 17 May 2013 (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.

File:Dibpic.jpg

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, unencyclopedic personal picture. 128.237.123.255 (talk) 21:03, 22 April 2013 (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.

File:McCormack TransitMix.jpg

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Insufficient source for WP:NFCC#10a. Tagged {{subst:nsd|non-free=yes}}, but the tag was removed. Stefan2 (talk) 22:53, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

delete Discussion of this file is moot since it has been replaced in the article by File:William McCormack (businessman).jpg, which is a cropped version of the same image. This picture was apparently taken for a story in the Feb. 9, 1953 issue of Life but was not published with the story (see here). I would presume that it was once included in the Google archive of Life images; I could not find it in the similar Getty Time/Life archive. I would assume that these do retain commercial value because (a) they are marked "For personal non-commercial use only", and (b) because they will sell you a framed print. Mangoe (talk) 02:12, 23 April 2013 (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.

File:Original crop.jpg

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: Keep for copyright reasons. See note below. Nyttend (talk) 16:19, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary image, no longer seemingly in use Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:31, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy closed. You probably didn't notice it, but this image is linked by multiple pages, including File:Difference 60 x5.jpg, for which it's the source image. Think of this situation as comparable to pages that have been merged — {{Copied}} prohibits the deletion of a page the contents of which have been copied to another page, because it would break attribution, and deleting this image would likewise break attribution. If that weren't an issue, I would have agreed with the nomination. Perhaps we could just redirect this to the Difference 60 image? Nyttend (talk) 16:19, 25 April 2013 (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.

File:Grameenphone Prothom Alo Sports Award.jpg

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is a design above the threshold of originality, it's a named award, and without further evidence I'm skeptical as to how this can be a self. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:36, 22 April 2013 (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.