Commons:Deletion requests/File:Topless blonde at lakeshore.jpg
Image is unusued, and whilst not necessarily 2257 level, the pose is semi-staged. Bringing to DR so that the uploader can clarify how this could be used within an educational scope. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 00:22, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
Keep Again this morality crusade? For your information a file not being in is not an rationale to be deleted (or care to nominate the millions of other images not being in use?). About scope care to explain why do you think, in detail, this image is not educational?
This image was taken in public and so there is clearly no expectation of privacy, and even the model (as you admit) is posing to the camera. And about the educational rationale, did you know what is Nudity, public nudity, nude\erotic photography and several related articles in the wikipedias? You can see the scope also by the categories in commons:Category:Female nude in photography, Category:Topless in black clothing, female, Category:Topless women with blond hair, Category:Topless women with piercings, Category:Topless women with nipple piercings, Category:Topless women with necklaces, Category:Topless women with navel piercings, Category:Topless women with bracelets, Category:Topless crouching women.
Image clearly in scope and nomination by an user with a morality and censorship agenda, as he nominates several nudity images with the almost same argument. Tm (talk) 02:46, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
- Withdrawn : The explanation you give above is essentialy the explanation, that I was feeling should be better articulated on files like this. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 03:08, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
Kept: Nominator withdrew. -mattbuck (Talk) 08:26, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
