File:Sst7.jpg ( talk| | history| logs| links| watch) ( article| restore)

The image was speedy deleted for non-free use. However, the image is not replaceable. This was stated on the File's talk page in response to the deletion tag placement. There was no reply to my discussion entry prior to deletion. The article is about a band that has released two CDs, taken multiple national tours and does so no longer because members have left. Fair use applies because the image displays the entire seven-piece band and such a free image does not exist. The image was also low resolution. However, if the image is restored and resolution is an issue the image can be made smaller. - Steve3849 ^talk 07:28, 14 December 2009 (UTC) reply

• Support undeletionSend to FfD, as it appears no new photo can be taken of the full band performing, and there's no evidence of a free-use alternative from the Google Image search I just did. -- SarekOfVulcan ( talk) 17:05, 14 December 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Changed recomendation per later discussion. -- SarekOfVulcan ( talk) 18:24, 21 December 2009 (UTC) reply
• Endorse - the Skerik's Syncopated Taint Septet group still exists, so a free image depicting the current line-up is possible. PhilKnight ( talk) 11:05, 15 December 2009 (UTC) reply
• Endorse. PhilKnight ( talk · contribs) is correct, a free-use alternative could be obtained. Cirt ( talk) 12:55, 16 December 2009 (UTC) reply
• Question [1] would seem to indicate the group might not exist any longer. Can someone show it does or doesn't (I'm fine if you all are going off personal knowledge here, I just want to know how you know it does or doesn't still exist.) Thanks! Hobit ( talk) 14:49, 16 December 2009 (UTC) reply

A site specific google search of a Seattle journal such as thestranger.com brings predominate appearances this passed year by "Skerik's Syncopated Horn Quartet". However I do see the mention in a forum of a "very rare show" of all 7 members in 2009. I still think a free image of the entire band is highly unlikely. - Steve3849 ^talk 16:36, 16 December 2009 (UTC) reply

If there was one in 2009, I'd say it's not unlikely a free version can be found later. Send to XfD I don't think this is a clear-cut enough case for a speedy. Hobit ( talk) 20:17, 16 December 2009 (UTC) reply

• List at FfD per Hobit. As there is a legitimate dispute over whether a free picture of the full band performing can be taken, this should not be a speedy candidate. Let FfD figure out whether this band still exists as such and whether a free replacement is potentially available. Tim Song ( talk) 07:17, 21 December 2009 (UTC) reply
• Endorse for numerous reasons. 1) The uploader did contact the administrator who deleted the image, but just 30 minutes later brought it here to drv, without giving the admin a chance to respond. Nor was I, the person who tagged it with the replaceable fair use tag, notified of this drv. 2) The article states the band is still together and as such a free image could reasonably be found or created. 3) Unlike what the uploader states now, he made no discussion on the image talk page in response to the deletion tag placement, while editing other Wikipedia articles, so he was here in the two-day notification time frame. Aspects ( talk) 18:17, 21 December 2009 (UTC) reply
  • I actually did put a discussion entry on the image talk page. That is one of the reasons I came here. My attempt at discussion was speedy deleted without response. - Steve3849 ^talk 00:36, 23 December 2009 (UTC) The edit would have been Dec 12 between 3:45 and 4:00, although I don't see a record of it. There is a possibility I didn't save the edit properly and assumed it was finished. Would the entry be currently visible? A mistaken edit exists here (BTW -- the history of this speedy delete template indicates the directions could be improved) - Steve3849 ^talk 00:48, 23 December 2009 (UTC) reply
• Overturn speedy deletion. As WP:CSD states, "administrators should take care not to speedy delete pages or media except in the most obvious cases." The file was deleted under WP:CSD#F7, for files with invalid fair-use claims. While the deleting admin did not err in doing so (the uploader had sufficient time and opportunity to contest the speedy tag), it is clear that this is no longer an obvious case. The speedy deletion therefore should be overturned; further pursuit of deletion should be through a FfD discussion. A Stop at Willoughby ( talk) 02:09, 22 December 2009 (UTC) reply
• Endorse. The image is quite clearly replaceable. There already is a free image of the bandleader, and one of the full band could be obtained. People have had success with contacting copyright-holders directly--the band themselves may be willing to release an image under a free license, or this Flickr photographer could be asked (since "All rights reserved" is the default on Flickr, many people there don't know about licenses and have never considered the benefits of a free license). There are instructions for how to do this, including sample letters that have worked in the past, at Wikipedia:Example requests for permission. Chick Bowen 16:00, 22 December 2009 (UTC) reply
  • You feel that it's clear enough it qualifies as a speedy? Hobit ( talk) 23:19, 22 December 2009 (UTC) reply
    • Yes, though I see and acknowledge your point--speedies by definition need to be clear-cut. I think this one meets the standard; after all, replaceability is a pretty straightforward concept in a case like this--this is not comparable to some of the debates of the past about things like unbuilt buildings or people who are inaccessible to photography. A band is pretty easily photographable by anyone in attendance at a concert. I do not know of a band that has given regular concerts during the Wikipedia era for which we've considered a promo photo to be irreplaceable. Chick Bowen 02:31, 23 December 2009 (UTC) reply

BS.Player ( talk| | history| logs| links| watch) ( XfD| restore)

Though the deletion nominator claimed that the article's external links about the reviews do not guarantee its notability, as all software are eventually reviewed, the software is still highly notable as it is reviewed by at least three reputable software sites (including Download.com and Softonic.com), and the reviews do not only state its history and features and are positive (Download.com rated it five stars). RekishiEJ ( talk) 06:17, 14 December 2009 (UTC) reply

• Keep deleted Went through AfD, went through DRV, went through undeletion, was moved to main, an admin said nothing changed but an added link to a download site. Nothing has changed for this content. This is not AfD round 5. Miami33139 ( talk) 09:00, 14 December 2009 (UTC) reply
• Speedy close this is becoming disruptive. Went through DRV before where the nom was mightily impressed with the 5 star rating, suggested WP:IAR to ignore the consensus of the deletion discussion, was pointed out how to go about getting notability standards changed etc. Nothing has changed since then. -- 82.7.40.7 ( talk) 09:41, 14 December 2009 (UTC) reply