Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 September 30

< September 29	October 1 >

September 30

File:Halo Dogs Ltd Logo.png

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Unused logo for a dog day care business. No encyclopedic use. —Bkell (talk) 02:24, 30 September 2012 (UTC)reply

Delete per nomination. Senator2029 • talk 05:29, 30 September 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:Tyrlogo.png

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Unused logo for a fan site. The corresponding article was deleted six years ago; see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The TY Revolution. —Bkell (talk) 03:01, 30 September 2012 (UTC)reply

Delete per nomination. Senator2029 • talk 05:29, 30 September 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:TTwinsSOMPicDisc.jpeg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Excessive use of non-free files, see WP:NFCC#3a. There is already another image: File:TTwinsSOM.jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 11:41, 30 September 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:TTwinsSOMJapan7.jpeg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Excessive use of non-free files, see WP:NFCC#3a. There is already another image: File:TTwinsSOM.jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 11:41, 30 September 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:TTwinsSOMJapan12.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Excessive use of non-free files, see WP:NFCC#3a. There is already another image: File:TTwinsSOM.jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 11:41, 30 September 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:Onetruelovepromotionalpic1.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F7 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:01, 5 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Not discussed critically. Fails WP:NFCC#8. Stefan2 (talk) 11:43, 30 September 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:Picture of Herman Toll.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Unused. Almost identical to File:HermanTollMeetsKennedy.jpg. The files differ, so it might not be eligible for F1. Stefan2 (talk) 15:49, 30 September 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:AWaveEquation.gif

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Unused images apparently illustrating some kind of wave equation. I don't know if these are useful or not, but there is no context on the file description pages explaining what they are. —Bkell (talk) 18:34, 30 September 2012 (UTC)reply

I've posted a question at the science reference desk asking whether these images potentially have an encyclopedic use. —Bkell (talk) 18:42, 30 September 2012 (UTC)reply

delete - even if they were useful, this is encyclopedic content which should be in markup, not an image, and should be supported by reliable sources, which these are not. The contributor hasn't edited en.wikipedia for 2 years, so there's negligible hope of improvement. Neither is used anywhere, so deleting both is uncontroversial housekeeping. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 22:57, 30 September 2012 (UTC)reply

Comment: If the content is meaningful, they could perhaps be used in a more general context, to illustrate the development of equations, which is often done by hand on paper. But perhaps a full page with many equations could be more useful for this. In any case I agree that the image description needs to be expanded. I don't see a strong reason for delete, but don't mind much if these images get deleted either. bamse (talk) 07:45, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Comment: The use-case at the time of their creation was in creator's talk-page DMacks (talk) 15:05, 1 October 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:ChineseChemFiction.gif

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Unused image. This is apparently Chinese writing inside a bunch of square brackets, maybe somehow related to chemistry. The description says it is "fictional text, not for use in critical applications," so it seems to be unlikely to have any encyclopedic use. —Bkell (talk) 18:46, 30 September 2012 (UTC)reply

delete, as above - unsourced, unused, little likelihood of use or improvement -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 23:52, 30 September 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:20101105 kara.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Invalid FUR--not necessary to understand the topic. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:54, 30 September 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:KARA releases individual Japanese “Jumping” MVs 1.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Invalid FUR--not necessary to understand the topic. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:54, 30 September 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:Karawanna.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Invalid FUR--not necessary to understand the topic. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:54, 30 September 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:INSERM Psychotherapy Effectiveness Study.gif

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Completely valueless file as it is inaccessible to anybody using a screen reader. It could be easily rendered as a table or prose, either of which is accessible by all. RexxS (talk) 19:21, 30 September 2012 (UTC)reply

Keep. There is currently a debate over that image in arbitration and elsewhere, deleting it would be jumping the gun. CartoonDiablo (talk) 22:40, 30 September 2012 (UTC)reply

Temp keep. If for nothing else is that it may be needed as evidence in the ArbCom case (request). Tijfo098 (talk) 23:11, 30 September 2012 (UTC)reply

If we needed to look at the image, we can see the deleted file - it would remain in storage, accessible to those with admin rights. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 22:49, 3 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Delete: unused in article space, should be rendered as wikitable not image if it were. Arbcom can view deleted images if it wishes. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 23:55, 30 September 2012 (UTC)reply

The Arbcom is about whether or not to have the image in articles, deleting on that basis is pointless. CartoonDiablo (talk) 00:55, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply

ArbCom is never about content, only behaviour. Nobody should be putting images of text into articles to the detriment of visually impaired visitors and we don't need an ArbCom decision to see that. --RexxS (talk) 16:13, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Delete as poor use of an image. --Rs chen 7754 23:47, 2 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Delete. Current evidence needs updating -- as noted above an image isn't accessible to updates, whereas text or a table is. —MistyMorn (talk) 23:55, 2 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Delete the only editor supporting it is the creator and there is no debate about its use. There is a possible Arbcom case on behaviour but the image is not needed for that ----Snowded ^TALK 00:54, 3 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Delete after ArbCom case is closed or rejected not a moment sooner and not a moment later. This doesn't mean it should be in the article space though. Sven Manguard Wha? 04:02, 3 October 2012 (UTC)reply

The Committee would not decide on the value of the image even if we did accept the case - we'd only be looking at the conduct of those concerned, so please feel free to vote to delete. Added to which, some Committee members are waiting for the community to resolve the matter, and hopefully this discussion will provide that resolution. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 22:42, 3 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Delete: Damn thing keeps getting edit-warred in despite clear consensus against it in multiple articles. —Kerfuffler horsemeat
forcemeat 22:42, 3 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Comment Arbcom is not going to say whether or not this image should be anywhere. The community should decide on its merits. Elen of the Roads (talk) 20:13, 4 October 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:Charles and Cash.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as G7 by RHaworth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:09, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Invalid FUR--not necessary for understanding, hoax of an album cover —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:39, 30 September 2012 (UTC)reply

Agree. Delete. Dan56 (talk) 19:41, 30 September 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:Clay.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Orphaned user images, I believe. No foreseeable use. Stefan2 (talk) 21:11, 30 September 2012 (UTC)reply

delete user:ThomasClay1978, the contributor, has no contributions beyond this image (and none deleted). It was evidently intended for a user page the contributor elected not to create. After 6 years we can safely say they've long forgotten this, and as not-an-image-host so should we. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 23:59, 30 September 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:ESC1994.GIF

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Orphaned. No foreseeable use. File:ESC 1994 Map.svg is better. Stefan2 (talk) 21:26, 30 September 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:Joinmelimited.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Fails WP:NFCC#3a. See File:Join Me in Death.jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 22:00, 30 September 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:TwinsYTMU12.jpeg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Fails WP:NFCC#3a: File:YTMUTwins.jpeg Stefan2 (talk) 22:02, 30 September 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:Gone With the Sin cover.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Fails WP:NFCC#3a: File:Gone With the Sin Single Cover.jpg Stefan2 (talk) 22:03, 30 September 2012 (UTC)reply

As the uploader, I don't particularly care whether or not it's deleted. Go ahead, author-requested. Regards, — Moe ε 23:39, 30 September 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:Gwtsgerpromo.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Fails WP:NFCC#3a: File:Gone With the Sin Single Cover.jpg Stefan2 (talk) 22:04, 30 September 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:HotGame-jpnregcover.jpeg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Fails WP:NFCC#3a, see File:HotGame-cover.jpeg. Stefan2 (talk) 22:52, 30 September 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:Jew_Bagel.jpg & File:Jew_Bagel_2.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Since there hasn't been any new comments or suggestions since I moved the images to the Commons, and the local copy has been deleted, the discussion is most likely over with consensus finding that the image was not worthy of deletion due to the listed reason. Regards, — Moe ε 21:43, 3 October 2012 (UTC)reply

I feel that both of these images are heavily inappropriate and can be considered to be racist stereotypes of Jewish people. I also belive that even if they weren't racist they don't represent Jewish culture as a whole but only Ashkenazim. Please considere taking these two pictures down.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 23:06, 30 September 2012 (UTC)reply

I admit not being an expert on racist stereotypes of Jewish (or other) people. Can you link to some article or source saying this bagel stuff is a racist stereotype? Or perhaps explain why you think it is? (I remember there was a bruhaha about polandball a while back, and I had never heard of that either before seeing it on ANI.) Tijfo098 (talk) 23:17, 30 September 2012 (UTC)reply

Stereotypes of Jews to start. I will begin looking for other pages but I don't feel it is necessary.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 23:26, 30 September 2012 (UTC)reply

Seems strange that these are listed as awards on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Jewish_culture if it was offensive to jews? Also WP:NOTCENSORED? — raeky T 23:49, 30 September 2012 (UTC)reply

So are you saying that passing out Quiche for LGBT or Fried Chicken for Blacks or Rice for Asians is appropriate if started by their groups wikiproject?-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 23:53, 30 September 2012 (UTC)reply

(edit conflict)Sure, WP:NOTCENSORED and WP:PROFANE, or should we get rid of the nazi insignas on nazi pages, Depictions of Muhammad, Images on Zoophilia or Sex position, what about Lynching photographs? Theres plenty of offensive material on wikipedia, and we have policies to deal with it? But really are these images offensive, a jewish wikiproject is using them? — raeky T 00:04, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Keep [or Rename, as others have suggested] - It was uploaded 6 years ago by Masterhomer (talk · contribs), who is no longer active, but it's clear from his user page that he's Jewish and is very interested in Jewish culture. The user calling himself "Rainbowofpeace" I'm sure means well, but his nomination here is wrong-headed and ignorant. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:55, 30 September 2012 (UTC)reply

By the way I am not a he so please use proper pronouns.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 00:19, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Sure. Which pronouns should we use? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:03, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Comment - Once again the famous he's Jewish comment. The fact that African Americans will sometimes call themselves the N-word does not make it appropriate for use in a non-educational fashion on wikipedia. The fact of the matter is that they are using a hurtful stereotype and it is inappropriate.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 00:03, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Meh It's been on Wikipedia for six years and there hasn't been much hoopla about it and it's only use is on an inactive WikiProject. Every person who uses the word shalom isn't insulting a Jew in the process as the Stereotypes of Jews article suggests. The Jewish bagel barnstar or whatever it is, isn't exactly the most harmful thing we have around here, and could possibly even be considered humorous. Now pending what people do with it is another thing entirely, but the image itself is hardly worth deleting. Regards, — Moe ε 00:16, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
<Makes shrug gesture> Rainbowofpeace might want to investigate Jewish humour. And perhaps consider how funny it is for a shiksa to be telling Jewish editors what's antisemitic. Elen of the Roads (talk) 00:38, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
I'm not a shiksa I'm Jewish. I am however not Ashkenazi and bagels and yiddish words like Shiksa have NOTHING to do with my culture. And whether you agree with me or not is up to you but the feelings I have are one hundred percent legitimate and you should stop telling me that they are silly.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 00:43, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply

OK, so you're saying Ashkenasi Jews are antisemitic....??? Or just their jokes. And what's antisemitic about a bagel anyway? Elen of the Roads (talk) 00:47, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply

When did I say that Ashkenazi Jews are antisemitic? And second of all I've already pointed above if you make a direct comparison between bagels and other ethnic foods such as mexicans and tacos or blacks and fried chicken it shouldn't be that hard to see how racist the use is.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 00:53, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply

It's obviously a humorous play on the cliche of the "barnstar". I've never heard of any Jew being offended by either bagels or the 6-pointed star, except you. Your lack of a sense of humor is your problem, not ours. You need to find more important battles to fight. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:00, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply

I thought the OP's ID sounded familiar. 3 days short of a year ago, Rainbow was talking about taking wikipedia to court, and barely avoided permanent banishment. Looks as if Rainbow has had a boring year and is looking for another fght. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:10, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply

I have semi-reopened the WP:ANI section that started this tempest in a teapot. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:20, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply

So you are going to silence me from making any differences on wikipedia for a mistake I made a year ago. I consider that defemation especially since I have already taken responsibility for what I have done.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 01:45, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply

If you're trying to make another legal threat, you're doing a good job of it. Retract it immediately or you will be blocked again. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:50, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply

It is not a legal threat through anything other than wikipedias own system. I'm saying that I will report your defemation to wikipedia administrators. So I suggest you retract your defematory comments especially since they are in no way related to any of this and BTW it says VERY CLEARLY on my profile what my prefered pronouns are.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 02:01, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply

I couldn't find your preferred pronouns, so please state them here. Meanwhile, anything resembling a legal threat is against the rules. So you MUST remove your misspelled comments about "defemation", if you still want to edit here. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:05, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply

I refuse to. The fact that I call you out for doing something wrong does not mean that I'm going to sue you for it. And I'm sure that wiki adminstrators will back me up.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 02:09, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply

You refuse to state what pronouns you want to be called by? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:10, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Oh, I see: "Pronouns: Preferably Genderneutral". Sorry, that does not compute. "Preferably Genderneutral" is not a pronoun. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:12, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply

I refuse to retract what you call "legal threats" because they are not meant to be legal threats but to point out your wrongdoing. If I truely wanted to sue you I would tell you bluntly not beat around the bush. However your defamatory comments I find rather rude and will definately not allow them and Gender-neutral means I give you the option to use any pronouns that don't tag me as a certain sex or gender however if you can not handle that you can avoid using pronouns when talking to me by using my name or find another way to avoid pronouns.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 02:16, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply

{{ec} The word "defamatory" carries with it some legal baggage, Defamation, and COULD be considered a WP:NLT per WP:NLT#Perceived_legal_threats specifically. In case you didn't know. And you perfer to be called "it"? Gender-neutral_pronoun#Modern_English? — raeky T 02:24, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply

The only one I can think of is "it". If you don't like that one, you had best suggest another. In regard to your legal threat, whether you get blocked for it is up to the admins. However, the rule against legal threats is to prevent intimidation, and your claim of "defemation" is too funny to be intimidating. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:22, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply

Keep. The fact that it is used on a WikiProject page frequented by Jewish people sort of makes it clear that it isn't racist. 69.62.243.48 (talk) 01:30, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete I don't think whether or not its racist matters. The fact is that it holds no place on the encyclopedia. It's not used anywhere except for the Wikiproject pages, and frankly it's a crappy, crude, photoshop job that does nothing but cast doubt upon the creator's professionalism. Argopelter (talk) 02:18, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
- Then you should nominate ALL barnstar-type things for deletion. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:22, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
  - Did I ask you to harass me? Argopelter (talk) 02:29, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
    - - Where did I harass you? You can't expect your comments to stand unchallenged. Rainbow certainly doesn't do that. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:53, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
    - I didn't ask Baseball Bugs to harass me either but he clearly dosn't care and yes Baseball Bugs your profile does suggest you are male therefore I'm using your proper pronouns unless you would like me to use different ones.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 02:32, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
      - I don't care what pronouns you use, but meanwhile I'm still waiting to hear what pronouns you consider acceptable. Don't give me vague generalities, give a specific list. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:53, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
        Ze, Zer and They are my favorites.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 03:01, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Comment — Nominator has failed to adequately explain why this image could be offensive to Jews beyond that of a harmless stereotype. Ironically, this image might be more offensive to non-Jews who may claim that bagels are not a Jewish cuisine but were adopted by Jewish culture, and for good reason—they taste delicious! Viriditas (talk) 03:17, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
- Harmless is a matter of opinion, I have also claimed that if we had pictures of money and put a star of david over it It would offensive. It we did a picture of a black lady eating water melon or fried chicken it would be offensive if we did hispanics eating tacos it would be offensive what is the difference?-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 03:18, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
  - The difference is, there is no established negative stereotype associating bagels with Jews. Do I like the image? Not particularly. Does it enforce a negative stereotype? You really haven't shown that. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying you should do more research and find out if there is a negative association between the two. Failing that, you should contact the project and discuss replacing it. Then, if you are successful, you could try to have the image deleted as an orphan. Viriditas (talk) 03:26, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
I really don't care either way whether the image is kept, since is basically a barnstar. As for offensiveness: please don't be silly. I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who wasn't actively looking for offense who would find it offensive. Yes, it is rather specifically Ashkenazaic; other symbols of Jewishness would be rather specifically religious (vs. secular). There is no one symbol with which all Jews would closely identify. - Jmabel | Talk 03:39, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
- ~~It's not deleted yet?~~ — raeky T 03:40, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
If you renamed or to Jewish instead of Judaism that would work. The Star of David is used by both religious and secular Jews and applies to Jews across every ethnic division and denomination.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 03:59, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
- Not the right venue for that discussion, take it to Wikipedia:WikiProject_Jewish_culture. — raeky T 04:01, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Rename jew_bagel.jpg to bagel-with-jewish-star.jpg or something like that. "Jew bagel" does sound a bit offensive. Delete jew-bagel-2.jpg, or move it to Commons and rename it to bagel.jpg if there's not already similar pictures of bagels there. 67.117.130.72 (talk) 04:37, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
- I would support renaming both and moving both to Commons' barnstar category... — raeky T 04:39, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Keep The OP hasn't made the case that it is a racist sterotype and if it was they haven't make a case based on policy that racist sterotypes are grounds for deletion. Black face has plenty of flat out racist imagery in it but the images are illustrative of the topic matter. Possible this image could too, perhaps not. Either way that isn't in itself grounds for deletion.--Adam in MO Talk 05:31, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Comment If no one is opposed, I can go ahead and move them to the Commons since there is no reason to keep it local. I can rename the images from Jew Bagel (2).jpg and to Bagel barnstar (2).jpg or another suggested name. Regards, — Moe ε 06:35, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
- "bagel-with-jewish-star.jpg" and "bagel-with-jewish-star2.jpg" is probably most neutral and descriptive name... — raeky T 06:37, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
  - Or possibly "Bagel with Star of David(2).jpg" Regards, — Moe ε 06:46, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
    - Probably better... — raeky T 07:12, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
      - Good title. Descriptive and neutral. I doubt the original uploader meant the title to sound offensive, but I've got a hunch that's no small part of Rainbow's gripe with it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:29, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
        Sounds like a good solution. The basic issue here is that for some reason using "Jew" as an adjective sounds funny, not in a good way, by some sort of archaic association. For example, if I said, "There are a lot of Jew nurses at that hospital", it would seem to have a more biased connotation than if I said "Jewish" in the same sentence. The same is true if I said "women lawyers", for that matter. Wnt (talk) 15:39, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Keep or maybe rename. The image itself isn't offensive, despite the irritating SJW rhetoric of the nom. Not of the best quality, but really quite harmless. Maybe the name is a bit off-colour, but other than that nothing is really wrong here. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 07:53, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete. Value to project: none. Impact on project if deleted: none. Number of people who will be offended if image kept: one. Number of people who will be offended if image deleted: none. --Shirt58 (talk) 10:55, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Rename but no point in deleting the file; if it's renamed it can still be used (if anyone does), plus won't offend the nominator, who hasn't made a case that the file itself is offensive, but might be irritated about the name. Cheers, Lindsay^Hello 12:08, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Keep - Are they bagels made by Jews or of Jews? Inquiring minds want to know. In the end, a harmless bit of mild political incorrectness. Go find something more worthy to be offended by. Tarc (talk) 21:54, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Keep: If you think a file is offensive, you ask that it be taken down on the pages it's displayed. You don't delete the file outright p b p 22:11, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Moved to the Commons they are now located at File:Bagel with Star of David.jpg and File:Bagel with Star of David 2.jpg. Regards, — Moe ε 22:43, 1 October 2012 (UTC)reply
- Now that they're at Commons then that ends this discussion and it should be closed... — raeky T 07:06, 2 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Keep or Rename I don't find the images to be offensive, although the name "Jew Bagel" might be a little off-putting. Canuck^{89 (what's up?)} 23:46, October 1, 2012 (UTC)
Keep - Just gotta rename it so it doesn't sound like a Holocaust bread product. Zappa O Mati 00:33, 2 October 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.

A page that knows where it met you.

September 30

File:Jew_Bagel.jpg & File:Jew_Bagel_2.jpg