The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
05:05, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
05:05, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
05:05, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
reply
The result of the discussion was: Clean up and Keep for fair use. Dianna ( talk) 04:20, 6 April 2013 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; we don't have enough information to determine the copyright status of the photo. Dianna ( talk) 04:26, 6 April 2013 (UTC) reply
Keep - There's a million files that *might* have been in a dresser drawer from the time it was taken until 1982. I think this is splitting hairs needlessly. Given that this person was prominent in the community, this particular photo could realistically have been "published" somewhere in some newspaper or pamphlet or circular or church bulletin board while he was alive. It's a portrait rather than a family photo at a picnic. At some point reasonable judgement should trump hair splitting and we should spend our time trying to delete images far more deserving than this one. – JBarta ( talk) 05:29, 27 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Saw this. Upload to Commons and use in this case? – JBarta ( talk) 22:30, 29 March 2013 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
06:05, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
06:05, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
05:05, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
05:05, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
05:05, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
reply
The result of the discussion was: Clean up and Keep for fair use. Dianna ( talk) 04:20, 6 April 2013 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; we don't have enough information to determine the copyright status of the photo. Dianna ( talk) 04:26, 6 April 2013 (UTC) reply
Keep - There's a million files that *might* have been in a dresser drawer from the time it was taken until 1982. I think this is splitting hairs needlessly. Given that this person was prominent in the community, this particular photo could realistically have been "published" somewhere in some newspaper or pamphlet or circular or church bulletin board while he was alive. It's a portrait rather than a family photo at a picnic. At some point reasonable judgement should trump hair splitting and we should spend our time trying to delete images far more deserving than this one. – JBarta ( talk) 05:29, 27 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Saw this. Upload to Commons and use in this case? – JBarta ( talk) 22:30, 29 March 2013 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
06:05, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
06:05, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
reply