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The result of the debate was Withdrawn .
BJTalk 04:38, 24 June 2008 (UTC)reply
Please review appropriateness of this and other recent similar images from this user re issue of so heavily watermarked for commercial company (?needs removing as promotional spam ?). As you will see from user's talk page &
Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)/Archive_13#Article_being_used_for_marketing.3F, issues of username and self-work identification sorted (eg see excellent Image:Edsim clitoral glans innervation.jpg). I find the watermarking on other images though excessive. I'll leave a note for the user about this - perhaps they can remove the watermarks (I would of course see nothing wrong with the image pages themselves having the source details expanded)
David RubenTalk 03:40, 29 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Creator and uploader very sportingly provided new version without the watermark - but also provided a far higher quality diagram. IfD proposal therefore withdrawn
David RubenTalk 23:11, 29 May 2008 (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.
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The result of the debate was Withdrawn .
BJTalk 04:38, 24 June 2008 (UTC)reply
Please review appropriateness of this and other recent similar images from this user re issue of so heavily watermarked for commercial company (?needs removing as promotional spam ?). As you will see from user's talk page &
Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)/Archive_13#Article_being_used_for_marketing.3F, issues of username and self-work identification sorted (eg see excellent Image:Edsim clitoral glans innervation.jpg). I find the watermarking on other images though excessive. I'll leave a note for the user about this - perhaps they can remove the watermarks (I would of course see nothing wrong with the image pages themselves having the source details expanded)
David RubenTalk 03:40, 29 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Creator and uploader very sportingly provided new version without the watermark - but also provided a far higher quality diagram. IfD proposal therefore withdrawn
David RubenTalk 23:11, 29 May 2008 (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.