Edge Rewrite
everything Source code View original
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a29f062eea3e1528

Jump to content

Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 November 17

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

November 17

[edit]

All deletions/closures below against "keep" consensus, especially those where critical discussion in the article about the topic of the image was "ignored" by the nominator and not discussed by the deleting admin, are under discussion at WP:Deletion review/Log/2012 November 25. (My first DRV, so, sorry for failing to provide notice a day or two ago) --Lexein (talk) 01:23, 27 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:2-Bromobutyric Acid.gif

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:03, 24 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:2-Bromobutyric Acid.gif (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by ReactGroup18 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Poor quality file. Structures should be png or better still svg. Orphan File. Now superseded by File:2-bromobutyric acid.png  Ronhjones  (Talk) 00:19, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply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:Harmful Irritant.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:03, 24 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Harmful Irritant.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by ReactGroup18 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Poor quality. Better version available as svg at File:GHS-pictogram-exclam.svg  Ronhjones  (Talk) 00:37, 17 November 2012 (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:Cupid's Span (censored).jpg

[edit]
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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 08:04, 13 December 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Cupid's Span (censored).jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Mikhail Ryazanov (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Unencyclopedic. This image is a "redacted" version of File:Cupid's Span.jpg. The original image had copyright problems, and now the "solution" just makes it unencyclopedic. SchuminWeb (Talk) 06:33, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

Keep, move to Commons. 'Unencyclopedic' isn't a great deletion reason. Best case: move to Commons, as it contains no non-free elements. It is the subject of discussion at various venues. Another editor described its use as "tempting." To delete the image would damage the sense of those discussions. It is not prohibited or deprecated by any policy, guideline, or essay. And, it's still an option if Wikimedia ever gets the will to fundamentally protest abuse of DMCA. --Lexein (talk) 12:26, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply
That's kind of a ridiculous proposition. We are here to build an encyclopedia, and thus "unencyclopedic" is a perfectly valid reason. Additionally, I don't see what sort of educational purpose this would serve on Commons, as educational usefulness is required to be within Commons' scope. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:31, 24 November 2012 (UTC)reply
FYI, Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion explains that Unencyclopedic means "The file doesn't seem likely to be useful in this encyclopedia (or for any Wikimedia project). Images used on userpages should generally not be nominated on this basis alone unless the user is violating the Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not policy by using Wikipedia to host excessive amounts unencyclopedic material (most commonly private photos)." I suppose, the argument about userpages applies to discussion pages as well. That is, if somebody thinks that deleting a currently used image is somehow better than keeping it, they must provide a valid and rational reason for doing so. — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 09:25, 24 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Lack of policy against an image is not "ridiculous", it is a simple fact. Educational potential is in the eye of all beholders, not you alone. Educational value can be direct or indirect: here, the potential DMCA-based removal of content from an image of a public area is a kind of denial of reality, unintended consequence though it is, and an absurdity which is profoundly illustrated here. The image illustrates the redaction of depiction of the artwork from its surrounding park area, both of which were privately funded and donated to the City of San Francisco by the founders of the GAP corporation. By your lights, it seems no vestige should remain of depiction of the reality surrounding the removal of the photographic sculptural depiction, because the (alleged) copyright owner somehow holds sway over depiction of the surrounding reality too. They don't. That they might be perceived to have such sway is the actual ridiculous proposition exposed by this image. Aside from that, the image is an instance of a thoroughly in-compliance response to a potential DMCA request, which should be held in readiness precisely to comply. The image itself was already released by the photographer under CC, and edited under the terms of CC, so, lacking any non-free elements, its home is uncontroversially Commons. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (UTC)reply
No, moving to Commons as completely free is a thoroughly valid option, in the absence of any policy-based explanation why not. Just "we delete" - once again, that becoming-all-too-familiar arms-crossed attitude instead of actual discussion. Wish you'd answer Ryazanov or me. --Lexein (talk) 20:16, 26 November 2012 (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:Andy checking phone on stage.jpg

[edit]
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. Going to say this once: Contrary to what some users may think, "decorative" is a valid argument for deletion for non-free content, and is being treated as such here. After the first "keep" !vote, the nominator appended a more detailed deletion rationale, which rendered the first argument moot. For the second "keep" !vote, that was an attack on the nominator, but did not address the specifics of the image in question, and has thus been disregarded. Since the same images have been copy-pasted down the entire row, this should be taken as the closing rationale for all similar deletion discussions on this page. SchuminWeb (Talk) 00:37, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Andy checking phone on stage.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by NetflixSoup (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--image is not discussed critically, but is decorative (cf. NFCC #8.) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:35, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator has ignored where the scene depicted or the contents of the scene have been critically discussed. All such nominations are suspect and should be withdrawn as invalid. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:The office grief counseling.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:The office grief counseling.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by CPnieuws (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--image is not discussed critically, but is decorative (cf. NFCC #8.) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:44, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator has ignored where the scene depicted or the contents of the scene have been critically discussed. All such nominations are suspect and should be withdrawn as invalid. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Carride.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Carride.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Noir (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--image is not discussed critically, but is decorative (cf. NFCC #8.) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:44, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator has ignored where the scene depicted or the contents of the scene have been critically discussed. All such nominations are suspect and should be withdrawn as invalid. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Office sabre2.jpeg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Office sabre2.jpeg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Mackerni888 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--image is not discussed critically, but is decorative (cf. NFCC #8.) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:45, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Office scott's tots.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Office scott's tots.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by SchrutedIt08 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--image is not discussed critically, but is decorative (cf. NFCC #8.) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:45, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. Nominator has ignored where the scene depicted has been critically discussed by reviews. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Jimchuck teststore.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Jimchuck teststore.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Gen. Quon (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--image is not discussed critically, but is decorative (cf. NFCC #8.) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:46, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Office st patricks day.jpeg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Office st patricks day.jpeg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Mackerni888 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--image is not discussed critically, but is decorative (cf. NFCC #8.) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:47, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Bart's Comet.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Bart's Comet.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Gran2 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:42, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:The Simpsons 5F24.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:The Simpsons 5F24.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Mcmillin24 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:43, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:AllSingingAllDancingTV.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:AllSingingAllDancingTV.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Fr4zer (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:43, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:MaggieAynRand.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:MaggieAynRand.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:43, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:AStreetCarNamedMargeImage.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:AStreetCarNamedMargeImage.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Fr4zer (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:43, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:EotY.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:EotY.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by A (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:44, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:AStarIsBorn-Again.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:AStarIsBorn-Again.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Holiday56 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:44, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:A Star is Burns.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:A Star is Burns.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:45, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Planetoftheapesmusical.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Planetoftheapesmusical.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Gran2 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:45, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:AFishCalledSelma.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:AFishCalledSelma.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Gran2 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:45, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:22shortfilmspulpfiction.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:22shortfilmspulpfiction.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Gran2 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:46, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:22shortfilmsaboutspringfield.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:22shortfilmsaboutspringfield.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Gran2 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:46, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:ScuseMeWhileIMissTheSky.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:ScuseMeWhileIMissTheSky.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Holiday56 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:46, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:ScuseMeWhileIMissTheSky.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:ScuseMeWhileIMissTheSky.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Holiday56 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:46, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:"Round Springfield" (SImpsons episode - screenshot).jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:"Round Springfield" (SImpsons episode - screenshot).jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Andouble (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:46, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Bleedinggm.JPG

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Bleedinggm.JPG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Gran2 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:46, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Bt2.PNG

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Bt2.PNG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Xihix (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:48, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Bt1.PNG

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Bt1.PNG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Xihix (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:48, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Bonfire filming.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Bonfire filming.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by UZiBLASTER7 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:48, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Simpsons 8F16.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Simpsons 8F16.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Mcmillin24 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:49, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Bart the General2.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Bart the General2.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by MrJanitor1 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:49, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Robotic Richard Simmons.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Robotic Richard Simmons.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:49, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Burns' Heir.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Burns' Heir.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:49, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Cecil and Bob.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Cecil and Bob.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:50, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Strong keep: The imae in question is used on two pages, and in both cases it shows a character who is critical to the episode. In the both the Sideshow Bob and Brother From Another Series articles, Cecil's appearance in comparison to Bob is discussed in detail, so the image aids in helping the readers' understanding of the subject. -- Scorpion0422 19:47, 18 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:BFAS Deleted Scene.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:BFAS Deleted Scene.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:50, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Bart to the Future.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Bart to the Future.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Theleftorium (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:50, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep You're obviously mass-nominating screenshots for deletion without even bothering to see if they pass NFCC#8. This one does, as the designs of the characters in the future are discussed in the article. Theleftorium (talk) 20:46, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply
    • Response I did, in fact, read the text. Since there isn't another image for comparison, then it's hard to gauge how critical this is. On the other hand, I think you might be right that this is sufficient for explaining visually how depressing future Bart is supposed to look. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:12, 18 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep I agree with Theleftorium, the nominator clearly did not read the rationale. The image helps here because it shows four recurring Simpsons characters with significant redesigns. A suggestion for Lefty, it would be helpful if you could find an image with all four that shows their normal designs, and incorporate it into the file. -- Scorpion0422 19:51, 18 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Simpsons Blood Feud.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Simpsons Blood Feud.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:50, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Simpsons Olmec Head.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Simpsons Olmec Head.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:51, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Brother from the same planet.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Brother from the same planet.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Tree Biting Conspiracy (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:51, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Bart the Mother.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Bart the Mother.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Gary King (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:51, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Brother's Little Helper.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Brother's Little Helper.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Queenieacoustic (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. Readers can easily visualize Bart having smaller pupils. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:52, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Bart the Genius.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Bart the Genius.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Keyser Söze (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:52, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Bartsinnerchild.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Bartsinnerchild.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Gran2 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:52, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:HABF07.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:HABF07.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Keyser Söze (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:52, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Zachary Vaughn.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Zachary Vaughn.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Francisco97 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:53, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Bartofdarkness.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Bartofdarkness.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Gran2 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:53, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Bartofdarknessjimmystewart.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Bartofdarknessjimmystewart.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Gran2 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:53, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Simpsons-Sunsphere.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Simpsons-Sunsphere.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Awiseman (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:53, 17 November 2012 (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:The Simpsons - Bart Gets Hit by a Car screenshot.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:The Simpsons - Bart Gets Hit by a Car screenshot.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Sandgem Addict (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:54, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:FABF17.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:FABF17.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Enyo (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:55, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:BraveComboSimpsons.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:BraveComboSimpsons.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Dravecky (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:17, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep as while this image is arguably decorative in the Simpsons episode article, it's used critically in the Brave Combo article. It illustrates what mere words cannot. - Dravecky (talk) 22:02, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply
    • Response But that usage is also invalid. Readers' understanding of the band would not be greatly diminished if it was removed from the article. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:08, 18 November 2012 (UTC)reply
      • Reply: I don't believe that "greatly diminished" is part of the standard at work here. - Dravecky (talk) 04:54, 19 November 2012 (UTC)reply
        • Reply' All non-free media "is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." Are you arguing that readers significantly understand the Brave Combo more by seeing this picture? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:43, 19 November 2012 (UTC)reply
          • Reply: I'm saying that the image helps significantly understand the band's appearance on The Simpsons, as discussed in the accompanying text, better than the flat statement. The image also depicts a specific lineup in a band with a 30+ year history and an ever-shifting membership, capturing a moment in the band's history and illustrating their look and personality through simplified animation drawing that the text cannot convey. - Dravecky (talk) 17:44, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
            • Response But it doesn't: readers can understand that the band appeared on the show without the image. If there was critical discussion of exactly how they were designed for the show, then you could keep it. Otherwise, we cannot. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:47, 23 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. The nominator is being WP:POINTY by insisting on a fringe interpretation of NFCC, against consensus, against WMF, and against a rational-man reading of NFCC. The band's appearance as animated characters can literally not be understood at all without the image. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:D'oh-in in the Wind.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:D'oh-in in the Wind.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Queenieacoustic (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. They just have ponytails--this can be conveyed with text. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:19, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Deep Space Homer2.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Deep Space Homer2.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:19, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Diatribe of a Mad Housewife scene.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Diatribe of a Mad Housewife scene.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Ief (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:19, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:The Simpsons 5F11.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:The Simpsons 5F11.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Mcmillin24 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:20, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Duffless.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Duffless.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Fitch (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. No accompanying image from the film being parodied is shown, so there is no meaningful critical commentary. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:20, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:DufflessSimp.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:DufflessSimp.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Fr4zer (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:20, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:MartinBeforeDeath.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:MartinBeforeDeath.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by A (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:21, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:HomerMargeMaudeNed.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:HomerMargeMaudeNed.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by A (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:21, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:S19e14 23.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:S19e14 23.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by A (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:21, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Sneakers.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Sneakers.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by A (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:22, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:BBBReardon.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:BBBReardon.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:23, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Homer Strangling Bart.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Homer Strangling Bart.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Cam486 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:23, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Rake Joke.png

[edit]
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 as failing WP:NFCC#8 for lack of contextual significance (illustration not necessary for understanding of the text). SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:35, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Rake Joke.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. Readers can understand the idea of nine rakes being on the ground without the non-free media. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:24, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

Keep. The image is used to illustrate a segment from the episode Cape Feare that is discussed in depth in the text for the article. The image helps the reader understand the joke because it is somewhat complex. -- Scorpion0422 19:53, 18 November 2012 (UTC)reply
Response The question is not whether or not it helps, but if readers' understanding is significantly effected by the presence or absence of the material. If you really wanted to help, you could just include a video of the joke--that would be explicit and very helpful, but it wouldn't be fair-use, because it's not necessary for understanding. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:14, 19 November 2012 (UTC)reply
How do you know it doesn't help readers' understanding? When you enter with a closed mind, of course you're not going to see such things. As I said, it explains a rather complex joke that is very difficult to visualize. The image helps the reader understand this joke. -- Scorpion0422 14:11, 19 November 2012 (UTC)reply
I agree with User:Scorpion0422. It helps. --AW (talk) 16:50, 19 November 2012 (UTC)reply
Response WP:CIVIL, Scorpion--don't make personal attacks. Readers can easily visualize a bunch of rakes laying on the ground, so it's hard to justify this image in particular. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:48, 23 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator has ignored where the scene depicted or the contents of the scene have been critically discussed. All such nominations are suspect and should be withdrawn as invalid. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:CEDoh.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:CEDoh.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Holiday56 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:24, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Catch 'Em if You Can.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Catch 'Em if You Can.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Matheus Wahl (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:24, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Lesser clod morphine.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Lesser clod morphine.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Hackerlovesme (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:24, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Eternal Moonshine of the Simpson Mind.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Eternal Moonshine of the Simpson Mind.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:25, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:The Simpsons 3F24.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:The Simpsons 3F24.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Mcmillin24 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. Another image is included for technical details of the dream sequence. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:25, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:E-I-E-I-(Annoyed Grunt).jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:E-I-E-I-(Annoyed Grunt).jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Tree Biting Conspiracy (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:25, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:DudeWheresMyRanch.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:DudeWheresMyRanch.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Holiday56 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:26, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Moestomos.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Moestomos.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by I Want My GayTV (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:26, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:The Simpsons 5F12.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:The Simpsons 5F12.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Mcmillin24 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:27, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Di2.PNG

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Di2.PNG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Xihix (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:28, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:GABF12.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:GABF12.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Enyo (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:28, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:File-GooGooGaiPan tankman.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:File-GooGooGaiPan tankman.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Konsulromanum (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:28, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Goo Goo Gai Pan.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Goo Goo Gai Pan.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Keyser Söze (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:28, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Homer's Triple Bypass.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Homer's Triple Bypass.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Fitch (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:29, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:SimpsonsMPG 7G03.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:SimpsonsMPG 7G03.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by DChiuch (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:29, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Simpsons 8F08.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Simpsons 8F08.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Mcmillin24 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:29, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Homer at the Bat players.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Homer at the Bat players.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:30, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

Keep The image is being used to show the designs of characters based on not one, not two, but seven guest stars in the episode. It shows their design and helps the readers' understandng of the episode. -- Scorpion0422 19:55, 18 November 2012 (UTC)reply
Response No matter how many guest stars are shown in the screengrab, to pass fair use, you must demonstrate that readers' understanding is significantly enhanced with its presence and would be significantly harmed by its absence. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:15, 19 November 2012 (UTC)reply
Actually, the onus should be on you. Can you explain why the image DOESN'T help with the readers' understanding. -- Scorpion0422 14:13, 19 November 2012 (UTC)reply
Response The burden of proof for fair use is on the person adding the media. We should assume that all non-free media are out of bounds and only justify the small percentage that we can. That having been said, it's easy for readers to come away from this article understanding the topic without this media, so it isn't fair use. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:37, 19 November 2012 (UTC)reply

Way to side step. How can somebody POSSIBLY, come away from this article understanding what the characters look like when there is no image? -- Scorpion0422 21:00, 19 November 2012 (UTC)reply

Response I'm not sure how it's a side-step: readers don't have to visualize each character. If something critical about the design was included, then we could. E.g. discussing how the animators came up with Griffey's gigantism. Just showing drawings of them in baseball uniforms does not comply with fair use. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:49, 23 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Gradeschoolconfidential.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Gradeschoolconfidential.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Gran2 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:30, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Gump Roast.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Gump Roast.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Queenieacoustic (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:30, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Homer to the Max scene.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Homer to the Max scene.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Registered user 92 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:31, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:HomerBadman.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:HomerBadman.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:31, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:HBCandyGrap.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:HBCandyGrap.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:31, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Homer Badman.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Homer Badman.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Fr4zer (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:31, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Half Decent Proposal.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Half Decent Proposal.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Thardin12 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:32, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Homer'sEnemy.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Homer'sEnemy.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:32, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep The image shows the design of a character (Frank Grimes) who appears in that episode (and just that episode), and shows what he looks like. The character and his design are discussed at length in the article. It also illustrates a key moment. -- Scorpion0422 19:57, 18 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Good question. You have to prove that it doesn't help readers understand this key moment. But that is relatively minor, what is more important is that it illustrates the design of the character. -- Scorpion0422 14:14, 19 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Response The burden of proof lies with the uploader of non-free media. Also, the image isn't used to identify him and there is no critical discussion of how the character was designed in the first place. Take a look at (e.g.) List_of_one-time_The_Simpsons_characters, where there are no images. It would be handy to have a visual reference for all of them, but it's not fair-use. We cannot justify an indefinite number of images just to identify every fictional character. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:43, 19 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • But we're not talking about a list with dozens of characters. We're talking about one single character whose design is discussed at length in the article, thus the image helps aid in the critical commentary for it. Case closed. -- Scorpion0422 20:55, 19 November 2012 (UTC)reply
Response How is Grimes' design discussed and how does this image help readers understand it in a way that text can't? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:50, 23 November 2012 (UTC)reply
"The animators and character designers had a lot of discussion about what Frank Grimes should look like. He was originally designed as a "burly ex-marine guy with a crew cut",[7] but would later be modeled after Michael Douglas in the movie Falling Down[3] and director Jim Reardon's college roommate.[7]" -- Scorpion0422 20:09, 23 November 2012 (UTC)reply
Response And without a picture of Jim Reardon's roommate, we don't really know that he was modeled after him. That's how the policy would work educationally. Plus, showing him from a half-cut profile view is hardly optimal. A full-body three-quarters view would probably illustrate this better if it was necessary for educational purposes. Right now, all we know is that he wasn't designed like a burly Marine and text can convey that adequately. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:22, 23 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator has ignored where the scene depicted or the contents of the scene have been critically discussed. All such nominations are suspect and should be withdrawn as invalid. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:HHeretic.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:HHeretic.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Fr4zer (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:32, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:New Orleans Chalk Gag.png

[edit]
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. Fails WP:NFCC#1, replaceable by text. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:25, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:New Orleans Chalk Gag.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:33, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

Keep The image shows a response to a controversial moment from the previous episode. It is discussed at length in the article, and the image helps illustrate this moment. -- Scorpion0422 19:58, 18 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Response Because it's just white chalk on a black chalkboard. Once you tell me the thing he writes, I can visualize the gag. In fact, the visual is neither here nor there: the joke works just as well if you hear it, read about it, or actually see it. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:45, 19 November 2012 (UTC)reply
Response What? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:52, 23 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator has ignored where the scene depicted or the contents of the scene have been critically discussed. All such nominations are suspect and should be withdrawn as invalid. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:HABF03.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:HABF03.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by SeXyRed (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:33, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Simsons Screen Cap.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Simsons Screen Cap.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Mynameisorange (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:33, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Homergoestocollege.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Homergoestocollege.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Gran2 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:33, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:HomertheGreat.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:HomertheGreat.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:34, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Hurricane Neddy House.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Hurricane Neddy House.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Hackerlovesme (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:35, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:MooreClovesSpielgman.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:MooreClovesSpielgman.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Alientraveller (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:36, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:DwightsHoldup.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:DwightsHoldup.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by A (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:36, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:IAmFuriousYellow.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:IAmFuriousYellow.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Thardin12 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:36, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Lisa Tintin.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Lisa Tintin.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Fil Student (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:36, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Hungry, Hungry Homer scene.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Hungry, Hungry Homer scene.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Registered user 92 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:36, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:ImSpellingAsFastAsICan.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:ImSpellingAsFastAsICan.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Holiday56 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:37, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Itchy and Scratchy The Movie title card.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Itchy and Scratchy The Movie title card.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Registered user 92 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:37, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:S18e07 123.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:S18e07 123.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by A (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:37, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Scratchtasia.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Scratchtasia.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:38, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:ItchyScratchyLand.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:ItchyScratchyLand.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:38, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Kamp Krusty.gif

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Kamp Krusty.gif (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Keyser Söze (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:38, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:ItchyAndScratchyLandPark.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:ItchyAndScratchyLandPark.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Fr4zer (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:38, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:ItchyScratchyMarge.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:ItchyScratchyMarge.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:39, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Inmargewetrust.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Inmargewetrust.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Gran2 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:39, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:FABF04.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:FABF04.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Ief (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:39, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Mrsparkle.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Mrsparkle.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Gran2 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:40, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Homer vs. The Eighteenth Amendment.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Homer vs. The Eighteenth Amendment.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Gran2 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:40, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Simpsons No Doubt.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Simpsons No Doubt.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:41, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Homerpalooza.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Homerpalooza.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Keyser Söze (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:41, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Homer Vs Patty And Selma.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Homer Vs Patty And Selma.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Fr4zer (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:41, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Kiss Kiss, Bang Bangalore.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Kiss Kiss, Bang Bangalore.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by IRbaboon (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:42, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Homie the Clown.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Homie the Clown.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Gran2 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:42, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Koth2.PNG

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Koth2.PNG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Xihix (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:43, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Simpsons episode "Lard of the Dance" (screenshot).jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Simpsons episode "Lard of the Dance" (screenshot).jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Registered user 92 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:43, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:KrustyGetsKancelled.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:KrustyGetsKancelled.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:44, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:The grumple.jpg

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:The grumple.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by UZiBLASTER7 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:44, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Koth1.PNG

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Koth1.PNG (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Xihix (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:44, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Johnny Carson - Krusty Gets Kancelled.png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Johnny Carson - Krusty Gets Kancelled.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Scorpion0422 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Invalid FUR--this image is used decoratively rather than critically and readers' understanding would not be significantly diminished with its deletion. (NFCC#8) Invalid FUR: Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. This image is not critical for understanding, but is used in a decorative fashion. Since this file does not greatly enhance understanding, nor will its omission greatly decrease understanding, it must be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:45, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Keep. "It's decorative" is not a valid argument. The editor must specify why this image specifically does not belong in the article. --Maitch (talk) 17:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)reply
  • Keep. "Decorative" is still not a valid deletion reason, and must be removed. Nominator further falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding" and "greatly enhance" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it is egregiously bad form. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2012 (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:Interstate 422 (AL).png

[edit]
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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)reply

File:Interstate 422 (AL).png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Aws06828 (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log).

Unused and deprecated; superseded by File:I-422.svg which is more accurate. Kinu t/c 23:37, 17 November 2012 (UTC)reply

  • Comment does the I-422 sign used in Alabama say "Alabama" on it? If it does, then how does the SVG file you point to supercede it, since it doesn't contain that. -- 70.24.250.26 (talk) 06:43, 18 November 2012 (UTC)reply
    • The sign nominated does not meet MUTCD standards. State names are currently optional per the MUTCD as well, and even if signage did say Alabama, it would look nothing like this at all. (Likewise, I-422 does not exist presently, so that point is moot.) --Kinu t/c 19:46, 18 November 2012 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2012_November_17&oldid=1138518667"