Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 August 21

< August 20	August 22 >

August 21

File:Jup ganymede comp.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: Keep Magog the Ogre (t • c) 07:02, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

described as "Image on commons as Image:Ganymede, moon of Jupiter, NASA.jpg in better quality. Links to image repaired." Bulwersator (talk) 06:33, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I originally cropped this image. I'm going to suggest keep because it's a different view from the replacement, but I'm not strongly opposed to deleting if there really is no use for this. —siro χ o 07:36, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: plainly obsolete, low-quality, and orphaned. Mephistophelian (talk) 09:15, 21 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Move to commons clearly a different view from the one on Commons, even if you rotate the image. -- 76.65.128.252 (talk) 04:58, 23 August 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.

File:Nepenthes gracillima distribution.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 Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:05, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unused distribution map without any sources for distribution of this plant. Bulwersator (talk) 08:57, 21 August 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.

File:Quinn James Season 9.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 as F5 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 23:01, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned and redundant: alternative exists in another format: File:Shantel Van Santen as Quinn James.jpg. Mephistophelian (talk) 08:59, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not to mention the skewed aspect...unless her head really is 4 times taller than it is wide... Buffs (talk) 02:50, 27 August 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.

File:CDU(Ost).gif

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 Magog the Ogre (t • c) 07:04, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lower resolution and quality than http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Flagge_der_CDU_%28Ost%29.svg Bulwersator (talk) 09:56, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, considering that the commons file might get deleted (logo). --Soman (talk) 10:30, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- And see the stamp discussions on Commons where it is suggested that the mentioned copyright law section (§ 5 Abs. 1) only applies to text. It is very possible that most or all images under § 5 Abs. 1 claims will be deleted from Commons. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:47, 21 August 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.

File:Rome 2004 Olympic bid logo.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFG. Stefan2 (talk) 10:16, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Removed from gallery. Now displayed in the same way as similar articles. Felipe Menegaz 10:23, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's still a gallery, although the syntax differs a little. Besides, the logo isn't discussed critically, so it fails WP:NFCC#8. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:47, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More comprehensive list added to the article. This is a historical logo and increase readers' understanding of the topic. It does not limit the commercial ability of the copyright owners in any possible way, since it is a logo of a defunct organization, and Wikipedia would only lose with its deletion. Felipe Menegaz 16:26, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Still fails WP:NFTABLE since it is used in a table. And it isn't critically discussed either, thus failing WP:NFCC#8. --Stefan2 (talk) 18:14, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Added information about the logos. For this kind of article, table lists (instead of thumbnail images, which in most cases end up in section breaks) facilitate comparison between the subjects. Felipe Menegaz 20:54, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. You have now demonstrated that these images also fail WP:NFCC#1, since you have successfully been able to replace them by text. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:57, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you know what they say... One picture is worth a thousand words. But if you're saying that a description of a logo can replace it, you better get Category:All non-free logos deleted. Felipe Menegaz 21:09, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, WP:NFCC#1 refers to replaceability by another [free] file, not by text. Felipe Menegaz 22:02, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NFCC#1 says "free content" and "free material". Nowhere does it say that this content or material has to be a file. Text is just as fine. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:43, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Still, logo descriptions does not characterize free content replaceability. Felipe Menegaz 23:29, 21 August 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.

File:Cape Town 2004 Olympic bid logo.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFG. Stefan2 (talk) 10:16, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Removed from gallery. Now displayed in the same way as similar articles. Felipe Menegaz 10:23, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's still a gallery, although the syntax differs a little. Besides, the logo isn't discussed critically, so it fails WP:NFCC#8. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:48, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More comprehensive list added to the article. This is a historical logo and increase readers' understanding of the topic. It does not limit the commercial ability of the copyright owners in any possible way, since it is a logo of a defunct organization, and Wikipedia would only lose with its deletion. Felipe Menegaz 16:26, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Still fails WP:NFTABLE since it is used in a table. And it isn't critically discussed either, thus failing WP:NFCC#8. --Stefan2 (talk) 18:14, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Added information about the logos. For this kind of article, table lists (instead of thumbnail images, which in most cases end up in section breaks) facilitate comparison between the subjects. Felipe Menegaz 20:54, 21 August 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.

File:Stockholm 2004 Olympic bid logo.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFG. Stefan2 (talk) 10:17, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Removed from gallery. Now displayed in the same way as similar articles. Felipe Menegaz 10:23, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's still a gallery, although the syntax differs a little. Besides, the logo isn't discussed critically, so it fails WP:NFCC#8. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:48, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More comprehensive list added to the article. This is a historical logo and increase readers' understanding of the topic. It does not limit the commercial ability of the copyright owners in any possible way, since it is a logo of a defunct organization, and Wikipedia would only lose with its deletion. Felipe Menegaz 16:26, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Still fails WP:NFTABLE since it is used in a table. And it isn't critically discussed either, thus failing WP:NFCC#8. --Stefan2 (talk) 18:14, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Added information about the logos. For this kind of article, table lists (instead of thumbnail images, which in most cases end up in section breaks) facilitate comparison between the subjects. Felipe Menegaz 20:54, 21 August 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.

File:Buenos Aires 2004 Olympic bid logo.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFG. Stefan2 (talk) 10:17, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Removed from gallery. Now displayed in the same way as similar articles. Felipe Menegaz 10:23, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's still a gallery, although the syntax differs a little. Besides, the logo isn't discussed critically, so it fails WP:NFCC#8. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:48, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More comprehensive list added to the article. This is a historical logo and increase readers' understanding of the topic. It does not limit the commercial ability of the copyright owners in any possible way, since it is a logo of a defunct organization, and Wikipedia would only lose with its deletion. Felipe Menegaz 16:26, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Added information about the logos. For this kind of article, table lists (instead of thumbnail images, which in most cases end up in section breaks) facilitate comparison between the subjects. Felipe Menegaz 20:54, 21 August 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.

File:Ranjit Barthakur.pdf

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 G11 by Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:05, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope. Also from "our website", so no evidence of permission. Stefan2 (talk) 10:21, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

speedy delete - wikipedia is not a resume/advertising hosting site. -- The Red Pen of Doom 17:15, 21 August 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.

File:Nepenthes dubia distribution.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 Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:05, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is supposed to be distribution map of Nepenthes dubia but I see no marked distribution. Unused file. Bulwersator (talk) 10:25, 21 August 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.

File:Cassandra fox.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 F5 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 23:01, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned and the fair use rationale is for the article "Facebook". Honestly I don't see how it could possibly meet WP:NFCC#8 in that article. Stefan2 (talk) 14:12, 21 August 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.

File:Gggbrihannadeluxeedition.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. SchuminWeb (Talk) 14:31, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3a since there already is a different image: File:Gggbrihanna.jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 14:13, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is an official alternative cover of the album and it looks very different to the original one. Ilikeriri (talk) 18:22, 22 August 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.

File:Libera christmas deluxe.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. It has not carried a fair use rationale this entire time, and has also been tagged as much for all but the first day. So even if this were closed as keep, it would still be deleted for that. SchuminWeb (Talk) 14:35, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:NFCC#3a since there already is a different image: File:Basic album cover 275 275 80 c1.jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 14:15, 21 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
I suggest Keep. this is the cover for a new (repackaged) version of the same album. 21 August 2012. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hitori12 (talk • contribs)

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:RelicsUSA-300.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Superfluous: File:Pink Floyd Relics 1971.jpg Stefan2 (talk) 18:10, 21 August 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.

File:Relics05-b-300.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Superfluous: File:Pink Floyd Relics 1971.jpg Stefan2 (talk) 18:10, 21 August 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.

File:Will & Grace - Fagel Attraction 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; deleted by SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:12, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image clearly fails WP:NFCC for the following reasons:

It doesn't help readers understand the topic (it's just a plain image of two men looking into the distance!)
It can easily be conveyed in words alone
We have free images of these actors (one is already used in the article), and since this image is so plain anyway, those are perfectly fine

Theleftorium ^(talk) 18:58, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I fail to see how this image would make me understand the subject of the article better in any way. --Stefan2 (talk) 19:30, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as stated in the image description: "To illustrate a key element of the plot in this episode. This screenshot depicts characters that are integral to the plot line. The screenshot depicts an important part of the episode and will be used in an infobox to provide critical commentary in both in- and out-universe capacity." Other articles about television episodes use similar images (1, 2, 3, 4). Also, I think images of the actors serve the purpose of describing the actors, not the episode itself. — John Biancato 19:37, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks, I've now proposed all four for deletion (see below). --Stefan2 (talk) 20:49, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - But the thing is, this "key" element clearly doesn't need illustration. What is there about this picture that can't be said in words? And it does in no way provide any critical commentary in either "in- and out-universe capacity". In fact, the scene that the image illustrates is only mentioned once in the article and that is in one of the sentences in the plot section. The fact that other articles use screenshots doesn't mean that it's right. Theleftorium ^(talk) 14:53, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Not only the scene, the article also mentions guest actor Michael Douglas and his performance. Since the show is a copyrighted work, no free version is available. This article from Entertainment Weekly shows the same picture when describing the episode. — John Biancato 19:07, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      - But the image reveals absolutely nothing about his performance. That's why a free image of Douglas is just as good! Just because there's no free screenshot from the episode available doesn't mean we have to include a non-free one - You're completely ignoring the first sentence of Wikipedia:Non-free content. Theleftorium ^(talk) 19:20, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Concur with nom. This image doesn't convey anything of significance. Buffs (talk) 02:56, 27 August 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.

File:Madonna mullaly dolls and dolls.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dolls and Dolls: fails WP:NFCC#8. There are just two people looking at each other, so it doesn't help understanding the topic any better.
Madonna filmography: Fails not only WP:NFCC#8, but also WP:NFCC#10c and WP:NFCC#1, since there are free images of Madonna which can be used instead. Stefan2 (talk) 20:47, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The image was removed from 'Madonna filmography'. For the article about the episode "Dolls and Dolls": the image illustrates the episode, showing a scene described in the plot section, and since it is a copyrighted work, no free version is available. — John Biancato 23:23, 21 August 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.

File:Friends thelastone.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just some people looking at each other. I'm not sure how this is supposed to increase my understanding of the topic. Fails WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 20:47, 21 August 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.

File:SofiaBetty.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just some people looking at each other in front of a table. I'm not sure how this is supposed to increase my understanding of the topic. Fails WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 20:48, 21 August 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.

File:Charliealan8.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:08, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just two people sitting in a sofa. I'm not sure how this is supposed to increase my understanding of the topic. Fails WP:NFCC#3b and WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 20:49, 21 August 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.

File:Toxoplasma gondii Life cycle PHILA 3421 lores.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 G3 by Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:05, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

joke derivation of original image - compare with [[File:Toxoplasma gondii Life cycle PHIL 3421 lores.jpg]] upper left corner - pussy changed to hissy. Created today, inserted for one minute in Toxoplasmosis. Shenme (talk) 23:29, 21 August 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.