< October 13 | October 15 > |
---|
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:14, 22 October 2009 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:05, 22 October 2009 (UTC) reply
{{
PD-Russia-2008}}
(Author is not listed, so it is unknown if it is anonymous or not-named.) It also doesn't seem to meet Criterion 3: "This work is shot from non-amateur cinema or television film or television broadcast, which was first shown more than 70 years ago." The image would have to have been in the public domain by 1996 for the URAA to apply, and it doesn't look like it was.
NW (
Talk) 01:01, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
replyThe result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as G7 by Willking1979 ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 14 October 2009 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as G7 by Willking1979 ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 14 October 2009 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by NuclearWarfare ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:05, 22 October 2009 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:05, 22 October 2009 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Kmccoy ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:06, 23 October 2009 (UTC) reply
Our non-free criteria do not permit the use of non-free images for the sake of illustration. There is no reason given that a Wikipedian cannot visit the city and take a similar photograph; while it may be difficult to capture as pleasant a scene as appears in this image, the quality of this image is not by itself sufficient reason to use it when a free image could suffice. If such an image were provided, differences between the view in this image and the contemporary view could easily convey the previous state of the street. Even now, a verbal description could convey the essential nature of the street — perhaps not quite as well as can this image, but enough that a nonfree image would not be necessary.
The result of the discussion was: Keep – Drilnoth ( T • C • L) 16:38, 23 October 2009 (UTC) reply
The stamps were widely discussed at the time of their release (being reported on the BBC (audience in the many millions)), and in the press but this was prior to the internet so the references are hard to come by. Any British Stamp collectors who were young at the time of Noggin being broadcast know the stamp. British philatelists know the stamp. But I would not have thought anyone would doubt this. (If people do doubt this then lack of references is important) On the smallfilms website we can see some discussion of the stamps and an image of the very nice poster by Peter Firmin used by the Royal Mail to advertise the stamps. [ [4]] On this site [ [5]] in a sub page under Memorabilia and The Stamps we also have some discussion. These are both referenced on the page. The Noggin stamp seems notable to me, worthy of a section and worthy of a picture to allow it to be identified. ( Msrasnw ( talk) 20:48, 15 October 2009 (UTC)) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:14, 22 October 2009 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:14, 22 October 2009 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:14, 22 October 2009 (UTC) reply
The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:14, 22 October 2009 (UTC) reply