Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 October 21

< October 20	October 22 >

October 21[edit]

File:William M. Connolley at Moeraki Boulders, Dec 2005.jpg[edit]

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:03, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned "keep local" personal file since at least 2011. WP:NOTWEBHOST. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 10:02, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Connolley is an active editor. Why not just ask him if he wants to keep it? Jonathunder (talk) 05:47, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:39, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It is unused and has no forseeable encyclopedic use either. And given that William M. Connolley has no objected in one month, we can assume consent from his silence. –Codename Lisa (talk) 18:05, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unused userphoto. Fails WP:NOTHOST. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:03, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, orphaned file with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 04:33, 22 October 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.

File:Windows 10 (version 1703).png[edit]

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:03, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Violates WP:NFCC § 3, given the presence of the newer File:Windows 10 (version 1709).png which can, in all respects, replace it. Codename Lisa (talk) 17:59, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: It is only being used unnecessarily in the Windows 10 page so that it won’t be orphaned and deleted by a bot. Darius robin (talk) 11:11, 24 October 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.

File:Swaminarayan charity old.jpg[edit]

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 at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 November 30#File:Swaminarayan charity old.jpg. ℯ xplicit 00:58, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 July 10#File:Swaminarayan charity.jpg, this is just the older version. But the license is clear as mud. We need an explanation from the uploader or someone at OTRS to clarify it the license refers to this file as well. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 21:52, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The OTRS tag was added by User:Peripitus, and it seems that there were already two files in the history at that point. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:12, 21 October 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.

File:David Bradley as the First Doctor.jpg[edit]

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:03, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think this fails criteria 3, as it shows the Twelfth Doctor when a portion with just David Bradley as the First Doctor would fulfill its purpose. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 22:46, 21 October 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.