Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 April 17

< April 16	April 18 >

April 17

File:Promo copy.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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is this image eligible for copyright? Everything is just text. George Ho (talk) 00:23, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless someone is BOLD and changes the license. I don't think that the rationale is reasonable for the given usage. ★ Bigr Tex 19:01, 1 June 2016 (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:Raised drill.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 Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:02, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Photograph of a sign/diagram. Possible derivative of non-free content FASTILY 02:23, 17 April 2016 (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:Burj al arab construction.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 Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:02, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be a scan/photo of a press/promotional photo. Likely derivative of non-free content FASTILY 02:24, 17 April 2016 (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:Henry Clay Work Headstone, Spring Grove Cemetery, Hartford, CT - September 26, 2015.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 -- headstone is public domain Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:07, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Possible derivative of non-free content. There is no FOP for 2D works in the US FASTILY 06:07, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The text says "Erected in MCMIX" which means 1909, so {{PD-US}} applies here.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:25, 23 April 2016 (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:Large beech tree near pond at Forest Hills Cemetery, Jamaica Plains-Boston, MA - August 15, 2015.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. Editor hasn't been notified after all this time and the editor seems active here. As discussed, suggest listing the images separately to allow for further discussion. Ricky81682 (talk) 05:19, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused personal images, not encyclopedic FASTILY 06:09, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (or nominate individually). These photos would be better if the uploader weren't in them, but (at least some of) these trees may be notable local landmarks and we should keep if there are no other photos of these trees. Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:11, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proceedural Comment I believe that the uploader, who was active within the last month, should have been notified of this mass nomination. ★ Bigr Tex 02:32, 21 May 2016 (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:Pow-Wow Oak Sign - Lowell, MA - September 2012.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 Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Possible derivative of non-free content; there is no FOP for 2D works in the US FASTILY 06:24, 17 April 2016 (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:Seefeelband.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 BethNaught (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:07, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation. The URL does not mention any license, and it is a page from an online magazine, that normally would not have copyright anyway. Tekstman (talk) 07:05, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Main Page of source site says "© 2016 Perfect Sound Forever- material can only be reprinted with permission of Perfect Sound Forever" and since it appears to be a still existing group a fair use claim would fail WP:NFCC#1.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:30, 23 April 2016 (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:Biography of Blessed Kunjachan.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 Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader is claiming to hold the copyright to this book cover as the designer. We would need better proof than this as the book cover copyright could be expected to to be held by the publisher. Whpq (talk) 11:01, 17 April 2016 (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:Christuniversitylogoblack.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 Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fails NFCC#3a as this non-free logo is being used for the same purpose as File:This is the graphical mascot of Christ University, Bangalore.png. Only one logo is needed to serve as the means of visual identification in an infobox. Whpq (talk) 11:11, 17 April 2016 (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:Dalailamachrist.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 BethNaught (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:07, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader is claiming to be the copyright holder. However, the India Express has this photo credited to AP, a news agency. Uploader has had a history of dubious claims about copyright. Whpq (talk) 11:15, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: No EXIF. No proof that this is their own work. Highly likely to be a copyvio. --Majora (talk) 03:54, 18 April 2016 (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:Assumptionchrist.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 RHaworth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:06, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is no evidence of permission available for this image which is claimed to have been released by Christ University under a creative commons license. The permission page given requires a login to access. The image itself is publicly viewable on the university web site as part of this gallery. There is no indication on this gallery page of an CC licensing; the page footer states "Copyright © 2015 - christuniversity.in" Whpq (talk) 11:22, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete: Tagged F9. Unambiguous image copyvio. No need for a discussion. --Majora (talk) 03:59, 18 April 2016 (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:Nina Dobrev at Vanity Fair Oscar Party 2016.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 RHaworth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:07, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

copyvio of getty image http://www.gettyimages.fr/detail/photo-d'actualit%C3%A9/actress-nina-dobrev-attends-the-2016-vanity-fair-photo-dactualit%C3%A9/513002474 ‖ Ebyabe ^talk - Attract and Repel ‖ 15:23, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete - This is unambiguously a copyvio and can be deleted via WP:F9. -- Whpq (talk) 21:42, 17 April 2016 (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:Raktabhishekam April 2016.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 prior version of image, mark as nonfree, add fair use rationale Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:45, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bogus PD reason. Stefan2 (talk) 17:17, 17 April 2016 (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:Sri Tirupati Venkateswara Kalyanam (1979 ).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: Crop back cover, mark as nonfree, add fair use rationale Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:41, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bogus PD reason. Back cover fails WP:NFCC#3 & WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 17:18, 17 April 2016 (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:Disco King (film).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 ⚡ 12:05, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bogus PD reason. Stefan2 (talk) 17:18, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Even if marked as nonfree, I'm not sure it's a great idea to have this in the infobox instead of an image of the poster or DVD cover. Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:43, 4 May 2016 (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:Ram Raheem (1974 film) April 2016.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 ⚡ 12:05, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bogus PD reason. Fails MOS:FILM#Soundtrack if unfree. Stefan2 (talk) 17:19, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Even if marked as nonfree, I'm not sure it's a great idea to have this in the infobox instead of an image of the poster or DVD cover. Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:43, 4 May 2016 (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:Kathanayakudu (1984 film).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: Crop back cover, mark as nonfree, add fair use rationale Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:49, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bogus PD reason. Back cover fails WP:NFCC#3 & WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 17:19, 17 April 2016 (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:Deshoddharakudu April 2016.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: Mark as nonfree, add fair use rationale Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:51, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bogus PD reason. Stefan2 (talk) 17:19, 17 April 2016 (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:Muddula Menalludu April 2016.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: Crop back cover, mark as nonfree, add fair use rationale Calliopejen1 (talk) 01:01, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bogus PD reason. Back cover fails WP:NFCC#3 & WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 17:20, 17 April 2016 (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:Bhargava Ramudu April 2016.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: Crop back cover, mark as nonfree, add fair use rationale Calliopejen1 (talk) 01:01, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bogus PD reason. Back cover fails WP:NFCC#3 & WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 17:20, 17 April 2016 (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:Simham Navvindi.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: Crop back cover, mark as nonfree, add fair use rationale Calliopejen1 (talk) 01:01, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bogus PD reason. Back cover fails WP:NFCC#3 & WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 17:20, 17 April 2016 (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:Anasuyamma Gari Alludu April 2016.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: Mark as nonfree, add fair use rationale Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:55, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bogus PD reason. Stefan2 (talk) 17:20, 17 April 2016 (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:Pattabhishekam April 2016.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 BethNaught (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:07, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bogus PD reason. Back cover fails WP:NFCC#3 & WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 17:21, 17 April 2016 (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:220CentralParkSouth.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 ⚡ 12:05, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There are now photos of the tower under construction. According to Wikipedia policy, it is best to use free photos of buildings, even if the photos are of the building under construction and not finished. That is why I am proposing this file to be deleted. CookieMonster755 ^(talk) 23:02, 17 April 2016 (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:Cimini di Messina.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:05, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cimini di Messina.jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 23:31, 17 April 2016 (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:Noi vogliam Dio.ogg

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 BethNaught (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:07, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The copyright tag only applies to the song, not to the sound recording of performance of the song. Stefan2 (talk) 23:52, 17 April 2016 (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:Teenie two 3view.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 ⚡ 12:05, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No explanation as to why this is thought to be in the public domain. Stefan2 (talk) 23:52, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There's an explanation provided at File talk:Teenie two 3view.png: it seems like it was first published in 1968 which is in the public domain. No idea whether or not this is accurate though. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:38, 1 May 2016 (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:Joshuabrowder.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 BethNaught (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:07, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like Flickrwashing. Besides, it's not under cc-zero on Flickr but under 'copyright expired because of age worldwide' which is obviously not correct. Stefan2 (talk) 23:55, 17 April 2016 (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:Nationstates parliamentary veneratika.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 Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, no source for the data so no foreseeable use. Stefan2 (talk) 23:59, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it belongs to some made up thing here.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:55, 23 April 2016 (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.