Memory Alpha:Files for deletion

Template:Ifd

Image:Jupiter-station-insignia.JPG

Image:Jupiter-station-insignia.JPG

Poor quality image and I'm pretty sure it's taken from the Star Trek Sticker Book. Deevolution 21:57, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

• delete or replace with a screencap of the symbol if possible . -- Captain M.K.B. 15:43, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

• Replace then delete. AJ Halliwell 04:42, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Could it be replaced with this: [1]-Nmajmani 19:00, 12 July 2007 (UTC)Nmajmani

Image:VulcanCapital2.jpg

Image:VulcanCapital2.jpg

There are two images of the Vulcan capital city where, I think, one would suffice. The other one is Image:VulcanCapital.jpg. Of those two, I decided to bring this one up for deletion, because it is of lesser quality and at the moment only used on Vulcan (planet) (where a dozen images are too much already). I don't care about the exact image used. If this shot is considered better than the other, it can be uploaded using the other filename. -- Cid Highwind 16:34, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Neutral.Are we sure they're the same city? I don't remember the one from "Home" being identified as the capital, it was just an establishing shot for T'Les's house. - AJ Halliwell 04:42, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Keep and Rename. Shows "residential" Vulcan, which we haven't seen elsewhere. - AJ Halliwell 17:47, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Keep, as we never found out if T'Les lives in the capital or not, and besides, what's the problem with having both images? Now that TOS Vulcan is changed in the remastered episodes, why not keep the images to compare? And if you want one of them in a larger size, tell me and I'll upload a larger version. --Jörg 17:19, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Hmm... If we can't even be sure that both images show the capital city, more reason to delete one of them. An image not showing the Vulcan capital shouldn't have a filename "VulcanCapital*.jpg" ;) -- Cid Highwind 23:28, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, and then it should be re-uploaded as "Vulcan at dawn.jpg" or something similar. Seriously, I don't see why we have to loose one of the images. They are quite different and distinct. --Jörg 07:52, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Basically, the whole story ist this:

1. I checked the article Vulcan, and found a bunch of images in an ugly sidebar table, also too much for the amount of text in the article.
2. Two of those images were apparently showing the Vulcan capital city. One of them also in use on another page, the other one just this page.
3. So, while rearranging images on the page, I decided to remove what I thought was a duplicate, and bring the then-orphaned image up for deletion.

In the end, if the second image is not the Vulcan capital, and we have a place to put that image, of course it can be uploaded again. However, I think that the article "Vulcan" can not be this place, because I already had to temporarily move 9-10 images to a gallery at the end of the article since they had no real place in the article. :) -- Cid Highwind 17:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

On that note, some of those images really don't need to be there. Earth doesn't have an image of every landmark and city we've seen on it, why should Vulcan? Most of them have articles of their own, linked to in the article. - AJ Halliwell 17:47, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Romulanhand.jpg

Image:Romulanhand.jpg

Personal use image. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 21:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. Although, I suppose it could be used for the thaloron device... - AJ Halliwell 14:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, possibly rename - we have no images of this device based on some simple searches of topics and images. --Alan del Beccio 03:51, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Definitely needs to be renamed, the focus is not the hand, but the device itself. The image is of good quality, it just needs to be renamed and used in a section.-Randomname 01:23, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Klingon weapon Photos

File:Kling ghonDoq.jpg File:Kling chuHwI'.jpg 6 image links removed...

They all come from http://www.klingonimperialweaponsguild.org

The site has this Notice at the bottom:

"This page is for personal, recreational and non profit use. *Klingon* is a copyright item and the property of Paramount Studios and the Estate of Gene Roddenberry. No infringement on those rights are intended.

The Klingon Imperial Weapons Guild is an original concept of Ambassador Lady K'Zin (Capucine Plourde) and K'Daq Kasara (Richard Robin). Copyright 1997 - 2005.

The "Forge at the *Heart of Kri'stak*" and *mupwI'* are original ideas of K'Daq (Richard Robin). Copyright 1997 - 2005.

All knife images and articles are the property of K'Daq (Richard Robin) , K'Beck (Tim Coy) and the KIWG (unless otherwise indicated) and may not be used without permission." - <unsigned with a probe>

Well, if we want to keep them, then we could ask those people for permission. do we want to keep them? --Bp 01:05, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Good question. I am personally a fan of doing just screencaps, but many of these do not have a good screencap possibility. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 01:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

If we NEED a shot of one of these, then get permission, but screenies are preferred. --6/6 _{Neural Transceiver} 05:57, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Has anybody asked permission to use these images or at least tried to look for actual screencaps? It's been over two months; we need to do something with these. --From Andoria with Love 10:19, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Moved from copyvio page, can we get these replaced with the best caps we can find and delete these? --Alan 02:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

The images can be used on MemoryAlpha regardless of conditions set forth on the website as MemoryAlpha claims fair use (which "is a doctrine in United States copyright law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as use for scholarship or review. It provides for the legal, non-licensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work" -Wikipedia) I guess a tag needs to be created though... MatthewFenton 22:50, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

As has been said elsewhere, "fair use" is not blanket permission to use any and all copyrighted material. We do not feel that this falls under "fair use". --OuroborosCobra ^talk 23:16, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

As well, screen caps would much be preferred, as well as some confirmation as to indicate proof of their existence. --Alan 00:08, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

If someone wants to try to contact them to get permission, here are eMail addresses I found in the above link.

K'Daq <kdaq@kingwoodcable.com>

K'Beck <K-beck.tai.DevnoH@usa.net>

Editor3000 20:24, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I've deleted all but like two that still need to be replaced with screencaps. --Alan 03:31, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Husnockship.jpg

Despite the hint on the Husnock talk page, this image was added to the Husnock page, interestingly instead of the Husnock warship page, when evidently, the ship is in no way associated with either, and is actually, this ship, which already has a full plate when it comes to images. --Alan 07:15, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

OPPOSE I cite this script instruction from the episode script (found at Star Trek Minutiae):

27 INCLUDE MAIN VIEWER (OPTICAL)

We see the gleaming hull of an immense and deadly-looking spaceship approaching Rana IV. We don't need to be told it's the ship that attacked the planet only weeks ago.

Latter on, Picard states that everything they have been shown is a "recreation".

With TWO points of evidence that the depicted ship is a Husnock ship, and NOTHING in opposition to that fact, I find there is sufficient evidence that the ship is a recreation (at least visually) of the Husnack warship.Capt Christopher Donovan 22:48, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

AGAIN, I suggest reading talk:Delta Rana warship (where there are already 3 similar images already contained within the article) and talk:Husnock warship, both discussions indicate otherwise. --Alan 10:10, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I HAVE read both discussions, and they are full of speculation about what the Douwd may or may not have done, but NOTHING in that discussion goes to show that the APPEARANCE of the ship is not that of a Husnock warship. On the other hand, we have the stated script intention that it IS the same type of ship (at least appearance wise), AND we have Picards "recreation" dialogue. I'll take those two real data points over any number of Talk pages of speculation.Capt Christopher Donovan 22:16, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

The point, again being, that we already have 3 images of this basic design. --Alan 06:45, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:USS Enterprise-D, Bloodlines.jpg

near duplicate of Image:Enterprise-d.jpg. Deevolution 03:52, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

• Keep and delete Image:Enterprise-d.jpg, as in that image part of the saucer section is cut off, while in Image:USS Enterprise-D, Bloodlines.jpg, the entire ship is shown. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 16:30, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Kang, James T. Kirk, Spock.jpg / Image:Sulu in engineering.jpg

replace Image:Kang, James T. Kirk, Spock.jpg with a large image of Image:Sulu in engineering.jpg and rename. --Alan 02:05, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:SevenVision.jpg

Image:SevenVision.jpg

Collage images (and {{imagecollage}}) make sense if some object hasn't been seen on screen in its entirety, but we typically don't do collages of different scenes. This image can probably be used in one place only, the episode summary. It wouldn't make much sense in any other context, and could be replaced by two separate thumbnails, if necessary at all, in that case. -- Cid Highwind 20:34, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Please tell me where this policy is written so I may read it. I made this collage specifically for the VOY: "Dark Frontier" summary, for the context of the narration. There are a lot of images that, in terms of context, are specifically for an episode summary; so what's the problem? I will change it if this is insisted on, but I think that this is just nit-picking. Also, this is not a collage of two different scenes, but of two different screencaps pertaining to the same scene.– Orr6000 22:44, 22 July 2007 (UTC)