Commons:Deletion requests/File:Poposaurus BW.jpg
Inaccurate depiction (Should be bipedal) Should not be used - author request ArthurWeasley (talk) 21:23, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Files are in use and/or licences can not be revoked russavia (talk) 04:15, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
As per requests by author. This image is very inaccurate (quadrupedal, improper anatomy), is not used on any articles (although on some user pages), and much better variants (File:Poposaurus gracilis.jpg, File:Poposaurus gracilis (1).jpg) are available to use. This image is therefore out of commons project scope, and should be deleted. Also, because of the previous request being kept because "license cannot be revoked", the author has found wikimedia commons overly frustrating and has left the project, no longer contributing his fantastic images. IJReid (talk) 16:06, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: allready marked with {{Inaccurate paleoart}} and still in use. --JuTa 17:21, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Per previous nomination by me. I think this was a premature keep. I do not think that use on user pages qualifies as usage, and the fact that it is tagged as inaccurate should be proof that this image constitutes an unneeded inaccurate image. The uploader requested its deletion, and if this cannot be deleted for any other reason, could this at least qualify a courtesy deletion. @FunkMonk: , a commons administrator, knows of the frustrations the original uploader experienced, and also is very knowledgable of commons policies about deletions. IJReid (talk) 01:51, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
- Well, there is a Commons rule that says that images in any kind of use, even on talk pages, should not be deleted. AW did not frame his original DR specifically as a courtesy deletion, so we cannot really do so retroactively, though he did say "author request" at the end. But I am sympathetic to your concern. FunkMonk (talk) 01:58, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
- Really, then many other deletion requests should not have passed, mainly because of use on a talk page or archive? I, at least, think that usage on archives or user/talk pages shouldn't count as usage, mostly because user pages are supposed to only be edited by the user, archives are not supposed to be edited, and similar to user pages, someone should not just go to random user's talk pages to remove an image, which will likely result in the image being replaced. Also, as in the previous deletion request by me, one of the reasons for keeping was that the image was already tagged with the inaccurate paleo template. This should not be a reason for keeping, as being tagged as inaccurate does not stop many non-english users from using the image, and unless it will be corrected, inaccurate images are going to keep accumulating, even while the paleoart reviews on the english wiki are active. Btw, not related to the request, some multilingual users, like yourself FunkMonk, Jens Lallensack, Rextron, and maybe some others I do not know of, should start image reviews on other wikis, well, at least ones that have constant images flowing in. IJReid (talk) 14:39, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment Actually I intended to add a {{Keep}} here, but the source page only offers CC-BY-NC-ND. –Be..anyone (talk) 05:38, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
- It was uploaded here under another license by the owner. As for local palaeoart review pages, I don't think it's necessary, most people on other wikis can read English. FunkMonk (talk) 09:42, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Kept: as before. --Krd 18:26, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
