Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2013 January 11

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

< January 10	January 12 >

January 11

File:W.C.Whitney-1901.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, worse-quality version of File:William Collins Whitney by Charles Milton Bell c1892.jpg Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:24, 11 January 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:Waikei Wong student.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: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:39, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete there are plenty of better images available at Commons:Category:Stick figures. Thryduulf (talk) 16:45, 11 January 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:Wadems.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:41, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

delete personal pic of long-retired user. Mangoe (talk) 04:09, 11 January 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:Wald-Coat.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, superseded by SVG Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:44, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The Scalable Vector Graphics image at File:Wald-blazon.svg is a superior image. They're slightly different, but the latter is much more functional, per being scalable. Northamerica1000^(talk) 06:41, 13 January 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:Waking-dream1.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions �� page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, unclear encyclopedic value, i'm someone dubious that this is a self-taken photo Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:45, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

delete Briefly added to lucid dream as a decoration, it's not especially encyclopedic. Mangoe (talk) 04:11, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it is unlikely this is a free image given it's available on iStockPhoto (though uploaded there about a year and a half after here) as well as a few other places online. [1] ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:07, 15 January 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:WALES BANNER 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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, superseded by File:Flag of Gwynedd.png and SVG linked on that page, no real source for lion used Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:47, 11 January 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:WALES BANNER.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, superseded by File:Flag of Gwynedd.png and SVG linked on that page, no real source for lion used Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:47, 11 January 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:Powys 1190.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, no source for base map Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:48, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

delete superseded by File:Powys2 1190.JPG on commons. Mangoe (talk) 04:14, 11 January 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:Tupac Amaru I.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, worse-quality version of File:TupacamaruI.JPG Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:51, 11 January 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:Moravia.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: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, superseded by File:Moravia.svg (if we want a rectangular version it should be based on that anyways) Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:52, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment can we create a rectangular version first, then delete it as redundant? -- 76.65.128.43 (talk) 05:04, 11 January 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:Rabbit1.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, worse-quality crop of File:Cunicularii or The Wise Men of Godliman in Consultation.jpg Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:58, 11 January 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:Speallparkslogo.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Contravenes NFCC §1 as the article clearly explains the company's properties in writing without any requirement for visual identification of them... Mephistophelian (contact) 01:49, 11 January 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:Murder kroger t shirt.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 Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:06, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unencyclopedic, doesn't add to reader's understanding of concept. Borderline promotional. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 07:22, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep - needed illustration to show that "Murder Kroger" is a meme, i.e. a concept which is spread virally via the Internet and otherwise. Without the illustrations, it is extremely difficult to visualize "how" Murder Kroger is a meme. All this information is already provided at the file's entry on Wikipedia.Keizers (talk) 14:34, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Easily violates WP:NFG. — ξ ^xplicit 01:05, 20 January 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:Murderkroger.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 Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:06, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unencyclopedic, doesn't add to reader's understanding of concept. Borderline promotional. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 07:22, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep - needed illustration to show that "Murder Kroger" is a meme, i.e. a concept which is spread virally via the Internet and otherwise. Without the illustrations, it is extremely difficult to visualize "how" Murder Kroger is a meme. All this information is already provided at the file's entry on Wikipedia.Keizers (talk) 14:34, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Easily violates WP:NFG. — ξ ^xplicit 01:05, 20 January 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:Murder kroger cartoon.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 Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:06, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unencyclopedic, doesn't add to reader's understanding of concept. Borderline promotional. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 07:22, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep - needed illustration to show that "Murder Kroger" is a meme, i.e. a concept which is spread virally via the Internet and otherwise. Without the illustrations, it is extremely difficult to visualize "how" Murder Kroger is a meme. All this information is already provided at the file's entry on Wikipedia.Keizers (talk) 14:34, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Easily violates WP:NFG. — ξ ^xplicit 01:05, 20 January 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:Murder kroger facebook page.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 Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:06, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unencyclopedic, doesn't add to reader's understanding of concept. Borderline promotional. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 07:23, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep - needed illustration to show that "Murder Kroger" is a meme, i.e. a concept which is spread virally via the Internet and otherwise. Without the illustrations, it is extremely difficult to visualize "how" Murder Kroger is a meme. All this information is already provided at the file's entry on Wikipedia.Keizers (talk) 14:34, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Easily violates WP:NFG. — ξ ^xplicit 01:05, 20 January 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:Customer appeal from Viacom Time-Warner carriage dispute.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

obsolete: orphaned, superseded by File:Fox-Time Warner dispute.jpg--more relevant example for Carriage dispute Barte (talk) 08:18, 11 January 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:Ah pah dam final.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Computer-generated geographical rendering of a proposed dam project. Own work by Wikipedia user, but tagged as non-free screenshot because it was made with a non-free program (Google Earth). "Non-free screenshot" tag is inapplicable because it's not being used to support commentary on the software, but as a geographic illustration. Could be replaced with other renderings made from free elevation data (e.g. SRTM) and any free GIS software. Was previously tagged for F7 but deletion was declined by other administrator. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:37, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

delete The use of Google Earth is a problem, but a more serious issue is that this is original research. Producing our own inundation map based on elevation data presumes, for one thing, exactly how deep the reservoir is going to be filled. I'd be OK with a topo map which showed the general area affected, but a specific map of a lake which does not yet exist would have to be created by an outside authority. Mangoe (talk) 14:06, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The article contains a link to the original publication in which the project was proposed, which is unfortunately now a deadlink. I can see only snippets of it on Google Books [2]. But since that report apparently contained fairly detailed calculations of the reservoir's capacity and similar technical data, I find it hard to imagine that it wouldn't also have been displayed in a map in some way. We also have fairly precise information in terms of lengths of valleys that would be inundated (the report contains statements like "Maximum water surface of Ah Pah Reservoir would extend up the Klamath River approximately four miles above the town of Cottage Grove and up the Trinity River to approximately Burnt Ranch"). Of course, it's obvious that reservoir lakes always have variable water levels, so no precise stable coastlines can be drawn, but having an approximate outline calculated and illustrated by a GIS program on the basis of these data, given the reliability of geographic elevation data available, strikes me as the kind of thing that would be legitimate under WP:OI. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:50, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - If it's a published government report, even though we are only getting snippet views, any map it contained should be freely usable. It also would likely be more informative; this is bordering on decoration given that it supplies no locational context. Mangoe (talk) 16:25, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - I could offer this, by way of a map. It's not quite as impressive as Shannon's rendering, but should be informative enough. It's still "OR", if you will, but the GIS calculation is pretty straightforward – you just take the elevation at the foot of the projected dam, add the planned height of the dam, and have an elevation contour at that level calculated by the software. It neatly fits in with the information about the extent of the flooded valley length, so I guess it's reliable enough. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:51, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - I prefer the new version as being far more informative. I would still prefer an officially prepared map but at this point it doesn't look as though we are going to get one any time soon. Mangoe (talk) 15:16, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. If FPaS' image is sufficiently accurate and meets the OR/OI hurdle then that should be used instead as it enhances my understanding significantly more than Shannon's image. Even if FPaS' map above doesn't meet those standards it is a pretty good demonstration that a Free image can be made, meaning the nominated render fails NFCC#1 (based on my understanding of it). Thryduulf (talk) 23:11, 11 January 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:Ferrierofficial.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free promotional image of the subject, was used in the article because a free image was deemed unavailable. However, File:Kathleen Ferrier.jpg was available by mid 2011 and is free. It seems, per the talk page discussion, that the non free image was kept as it is a better picture. This is, however, not one of the non-free criteria. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:43, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you clarify that File:Kathleen Ferrier.jpg is free of copyright in the US? Brianboulton (talk) 11:10, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A CC license is universal, and the site is (to the best of my knowledge) legit. It's not the only one; our picture of Pleuni Touw is from a similar project. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:05, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How does this CC licence interrelate with US copyright law? This chart summarises what is PD in the US. As a published work not first published before 1923, nor prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government as part of that person's official duties, it seems that File:Kathleen Ferrier.jpg will be PD in the US if (a) copyright was not renewed or (b) it is 95 years since publication, i.e. 2046. AS the latter clearly doesn't apply, what is the evidence for assuming that copyright was not renewed? Brianboulton (talk) 11:23, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If it has been licensed under CC by the copyright holder, that license applies throughout the world (including the US). It doesn't need to be PD if it's already CC-BY-SA or CC-BY. Hence why the Bundesarchiv program is allowed (and its images widely used) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:04, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All right, if the licence was indeed placed there by the copyright holder; do we know for certain that this is the case? If it is so, I would like to see much more explicit and informative source and date information in the image file. The link to a picture of someone else, without explanation, is not adequate and would have been pounced on at FAC. Brianboulton (talk) 15:00, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As these are government agencies, it can be fairly safe to assume that they hold the rights to what they are posting (as it's not clearly stated in policy, I don't mind if you get a second opinion about this). I agree that the sourcing needs to be cleaned up, but I'm not on a connection that's capable of that right now (can't stream). If you're interested in adding the info, you can include the source (including its page at Commons and the time the screenshot was taken, roughly) and other pertinent information. Otherwise I'll try and get it when I'm on a better connection. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:14, 12 January 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:Windows Task Manager.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. According to WP:NFCC#3, two images should not be uploaded when one can fulfill the same purpose. In this case, File:System idle process.png and File:W8 Task Manager.png have replaced this image. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 23:02, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Still used in Ctrl+Alt+Delete — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:09, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi. It can be replaced with File:System idle process.png. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 15:01, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - I am well aware of that, having looked over several related articles before commenting. That was just a reminder so we don't end up with redlinks in the article. As a side note, showing the images here is against the NFCC, so I've removed them. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:10, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment These images do not necessarily substitute for each other. File:W8 Task Manager.png is (as the name implies) a depiction of the Windows 8 version and therefore does not illustrate XP behavior; the two that are of the XP version do not illustrate the same functions. No opinion as to how much illustration is needed. Mangoe (talk) 13:22, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi. See File:System idle process.png. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 15:01, 12 January 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:Concept-oriented model 2.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unused image previously used in the deleted Concept-oriented model article. Silver hr (talk) 23:07, 11 January 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:Concept-oriented model 1.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unused image previously used in the deleted Concept-oriented model article. Silver hr (talk) 23:08, 11 January 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:WalesWatkins.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:15, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

delete Not clear what this was for; apparently unused. Mangoe (talk) 13:27, 12 January 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:Walgreensside.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, unclear encyclopedic value (described as "A proposal for a Walgreens to be built in Virginia" [??]) when it was inserted. without more information about where this is, not very useful. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:22, 11 January 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:Walgreenscorner.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, unclear encyclopedic value (similar image described by uploader as "A proposal for a Walgreens to be built in Virginia" [??]) when it was inserted. without more information about where this is, not very useful. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:25, 11 January 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:Wali.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic (related to deleted page Wali Zahid) Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:26, 11 January 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:Walid Al-Menshawey on balcony 1-11-2008.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

orphaned userphoto Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:28, 11 January 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:Walkerheadshot.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Unencyclopedic (related to deleted article Kevin Walker (Project Appleseed)) Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:13, 12 January 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.