Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 March 21

< March 20	March 22 >

March 21

File:Co4.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 Melesse (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:03, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:NFCC#8. The image is used in the article's plot summary and appears purely decorative. liquidluck✽talk 00:45, 21 March 2010 (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:Tom, my kitten.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 NuclearWarfare (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 00:01, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

orphaned, blurry/low quality, unencyclopedic, no foreseeable use. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 00:47, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Poor quality renders the image as basically useless. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 04:27, 21 March 2010 (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:Ais.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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:08, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Low Quality, Unencyclopedic, no foreseeable use. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 00:49, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no value in terms of being educational or encyclopedic. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 04:28, 21 March 2010 (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:Camille.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: Withdrawn -FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 22:21, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Low Quality, no foreseeable use. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 00:50, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I wouldn't consider the image low quality. While it may not be a blazing 4000x2500 high quality image with perfect lighting, it certainly isn't bad, nor is it completely useless. I can foresee use in the future, primarily in Camille (singer) and/or other related articles. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 04:26, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's orphaned though. Wikipedia is not an orphanage. If you can find a use for this, then please feel free to withdraw my nomination. -FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 18:42, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Move it to Wikimedia Commons. Just because it isn't used here doesn't mean that it's useless. Note that the person it's depicting has a Wikipedia article. Mike Peel (talk) 18:59, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's by me. In closing, I think I should mention that this photo isn't even used in the article you cite. Redundant perhaps, but that doesn't justify anything. -FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 22:20, 21 March 2010 (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.

(Note that this image has now been move to Commons and deleted here under CSD F8. The image linked to above is no longer the one that was under discussion. Mike Peel (talk) 00:11, 22 March 2010 (UTC))[reply]

File:William R. Peck.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. — ξ ^xplicit 01:53, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Low Quality, no foreseeable use. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 04:26, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep image is of target that has an article and no other image we have has him in uniform. Hobit (talk) 02:52, 26 March 2010 (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:Boys1.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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:08, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Low Quality, Unencyclopedic, no foreseeable use, possible copyvio. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 04:36, 21 March 2010 (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:DutchEmpire6.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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:08, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As worded by 99.226.115.81, "continual copies of the same thing". I have no opinion in the matter; this is a technical listing. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:29, 21 March 2010 (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:Dutch Empire 4.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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:08, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As worded by 99.226.115.81, "redundant image. this one was chosen for deletion because there are no sources". I have no opinion in the matter; this is a technical listing. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:32, 21 March 2010 (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:Dutch Empire new.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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:08, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As worded by 99.226.115.81, "inaccurate image: no claims in Japan. Japan was always a free nation and happened to be an empire itself". I have no opinion in the matter; this is a technical listing. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:35, 21 March 2010 (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:Tvcatchup november 2008 logo.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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:08, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can be removed from TVCatchup without affecting the article. Cloudbound (talk) 14:44, 21 March 2010 (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:Adobe formerly macromedia.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 ⚡ 03:02, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can be removed from Adobe Systems and Macromedia without affecting the articles. Cloudbound (talk) 14:59, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Useful for reference as former logos of the Adobe and Macromedia brands. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.227.92.23 (talk) 20:45, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - doesn't significantly add to the reader's understanding. PhilKnight (talk) 14:52, 29 March 2010 (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:Easyas123.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 Orphaned image deletion bot (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:01, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned image from recently-deleted article. Sottolacqua (talk) 16:34, 21 March 2010 (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:Moon.Apennine Mountains.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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:08, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Obsolete; replaced by File:Apennines.jpg, which is higher resolution and under an OTRS-confirmed license.
Comment the new file, "Appenines.jpg" needs renaming, since the Appenines are on Earth, these are the Lunar Appenines. 76.66.194.32 (talk) 04:18, 24 March 2010 (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:Verfolgter Jude.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: kept, FoP applies. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:02, 11 April 2010 (UTC) deleted, was a temporary exhibit only. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:39, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image is a derivative work of a work of art in that it represents an original work of authorship created by Tisa von der Schulenburg in 1992 according to the description. Without evidence that the artist agreed to release the rights of the original work the derivative work can't be considered free either notwithstanding the licensing by the photographer. Hekerui (talk) 18:31, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
permitted under freedom of panorama http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_panorama#Germany .--IngerAlHaosului (talk) 04:11, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, IngerAlHaosului - I was trying to find the applicable info; I thought that a pic of a 3d work would come under some such permit, but I'm no expert; thanks for the advice. Chzz ► 04:15, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - German freedom of panorama covers art works that are permanently located on public ways, streets or places, while this was photographed in a museum. PhilKnight (talk) 18:15, 29 March 2010 (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:Flyersphilidelphia.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 NuclearWarfare (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 00:01, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned, Low Quality, no foreseeable use, likely copyvio, as it contains team logos of some kind. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 18:41, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete as copyvio. See File:Philadelphia Flyers.svg and File:ECA-Uniform-PHI.png. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:48, 22 March 2010 (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:Moon.Sea of Clouds.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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:08, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Obsolete; replaced by File:Sea of Clouds.jpg, which is higher resolution and under an OTRS-confirmed license. Mike Peel (talk) 19:32, 21 March 2010 (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:Moon.Ocean of Storms.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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:08, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Obsolete; replaced by File:Ocean of Storms.jpg, which is higher resolution and under an OTRS-confirmed license. Mike Peel (talk) 19:34, 21 March 2010 (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:RT1970.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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:08, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can be removed from BBC Nine O'Clock News without affecting the article. Cloudbound (talk) 20:16, 21 March 2010 (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:ITVlogoscollection2001.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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:08, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image is a collection of several fair use images but lacks adequate sourcing for any of these. Cloudbound (talk) 20:53, 21 March 2010 (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:BBC 2W News & Sport.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 ⚡ 03:02, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can be removed from BBC 2W without affecting the article. Cloudbound (talk) 21:05, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - has a suitable fair use rationale and illustrates the difference in presentation style between BBC 2W and the standard BBC Two service. DrFrench (talk) 21:06, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - the free image File:BBC2W logo.png illustrates the difference in presentation style, I'm unconvinced this images is necessary. PhilKnight (talk) 13:29, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, fails WP:NFCC#8 as the image does not add substantially to readers' understanding of the article and its omission would not be detrimental to that understanding. Stifle (talk) 13:12, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - not the current logo, isn't mentioned in the article, so adds little. PhilKnight (talk) 13:29, 29 March 2010 (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:BBC Ten RTS.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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:08, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can be removed from BBC News at Ten without affecting the article. Cloudbound (talk) 21:54, 21 March 2010 (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:Vinca A.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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:08, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Vinca_B.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_CH.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_D.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_DH.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_E.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_F.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_G.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_H.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_I.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_K.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_L.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_M.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_N.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_O.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_P.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_Q.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_R.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_S.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_SH.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_ST.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_T.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_TH.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_U.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_V.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Image:Vinca_Z.png (delete | talk | history | logs)

Orphaned, Low Quality, no foreseeable use. These were nominated two years ago for the same reason (see Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2008 October 4#Image:Vinca_A.png, but retained because someone indicated that they were going to write an article about the characters. Obviously, that has never happened. Wikipedia is not an orphanage; if we are not going to use these any time soon, there isn't any reason to retain them (unless someone wants to write an article - then by all means, go nuts ;) ) FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 22:11, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm assuming that these are the same symbols that are used in the article Vinča symbols, in which case there is a much better image that comprehensively contains all of the same symbols in much better quality, along with a few more. No use for retaining these. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 22:30, 21 March 2010 (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:Silent Prey.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. NW (Talk) 21:50, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Video cover being used in a biography. Could be replaced by a combination a free image of this living person, and text explaining the person posed in the photograph used on the video cover holding a pistol. PhilKnight (talk) 23:02, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Chapter and verse of the rules. Per Wikipedia:Non-free_content#Guideline_examples: Acceptable Use : Images

"1. Cover art: Cover art from various items, for identification only in the context of critical commentary of that item (not for identification without critical commentary)."

Meets that in spades. AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 23:40, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Carol Shaya#Silent Prey specifically discusses her appearance on this cover, and so another image is not a proper replacement, and there can be no free version. Moreover, DVD covers like book covers and album covers are generaly distributed widely free of charge to promote the dvd/album/book, and so the "market harm" prong of the fiar use test is pretty much guaranteed not to apply. Thus such covers are often accepted on wikipedia when they are discussed in an artilce, and indeed even when not discussed but the article is about the film/album/book. In this case the articel is not about the film, but a section of it is. The image should be used in that section. DES ^(talk) 01:29, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per DES. Hobit (talk) 02:54, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, fails WP:NFCC#7. Stifle (talk) 13:13, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- No longer fails NFCC#7. Image was removed by a bot because it was deleted. I've restored it to the article. Hobit (talk) 14:09, 27 March 2010 (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.