It looks like this image is not very welcomed on Wikipedia. Can you explain what exactly at CSD F7 explains this nomination? --WhiteWriter^speaks 13:50, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Just read what's written in the tag. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:53, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Per this discussion, this image is clearly notable. I dont understand your nomination, and i am asking from you to explain it to me. P.S. You didnt even notify me about this, and i just want to state that per WP:CSD, you must not delete this image personally, as a nominator. --WhiteWriter^speaks 13:58, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

I cannot express it any more clearly than I did in the deletion tag. If you can't read that, then I don't know how to explain it to you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:00, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

You should try. "For visual identification of the object of the article. The article as a whole is dedicated specifically to a discussion of this work" Where is this from? --WhiteWriter^speaks 14:01, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Just read the page. That's what you claimed the purpose of the image was. Didn't you even read the fair-use rationale you wrote yourself? Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:02, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

I have forgot it. Now its fixed. --WhiteWriter^speaks 14:12, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Bad rationale. Cut out the meaningless boilerplate verbiage you copied from somewhere; it doesn't work here. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:14, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

OK, we have two ways. One is that is ask 10 people about it, and at the very end have everything fantastic, which will keep the image here, or second where you help me, and which will keep the image here. Please, stop with this, i am really tired, and help me to fix this minor problem, which will follow your seance of good wiki image. --WhiteWriter^speaks 14:22, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but I couldn't help writing a FUR for this one even if I wanted to. Remember I still think it's actually objectively unjustifiable? If I were to write a justification for it, it would have to be a lie. I'm not a liar. If you want a justification, you will have to come up with your own. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:29, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, what exactly is wrong with this one? --WhiteWriter^speaks 14:32, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

As I said, it contains meaningless boilerplate verbiage that you copied from somewhere and that just doesn't apply here. "assure the readers that they have reached the right article"? (Why is that necessary, doesn't the article itself make sufficiently clear what it is about?) – "containing critical commentary about the event" (quite irrelevant for a FUR; you seem to be mistaking this with a formula found in other FURs, regarding "critical commentary" about a work) – "illustrate the event in a way that words alone could not convey" (why not?) – Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:38, 9 October 2012 (UTC)