I didn't delete it, since it is still viewable at File:
We need permission from the copyright holder (the person who took the photo) sent to OTRS to confirm that they agree to release it under a free license.
As some editors of the Wikiproject medicine have some concerns regarding the policy of using patient images on wikipedia, and regarding patient consents.
Also they believe that common's policy is not so clear regarding the issue.
This is because the author listed on the file page is "Graeme J Morris" and the uploader was "Soul.guardian" (not the same name). Killiondude ( You deleted this image because of "No OTRS permission". Nyttend ( Hello, Sorry for spaming your talk page, but this is very important.
There's a discussion going on at en: User talk: Materialscientist, section "Question about cross-deleted image", about this image's deletion, since Materialscientist deleted the image from Wikipedia because it was here. On the behalf of the Wikiproject medicine at the en.wikipedia, I am inviting you to be a part of the discussion going on the project's talk page about Patient images, The discussion started after I obtained a permission to more than 23000 dermatology related images, and about 1500 radiology images.
I'm not a mind reader as to how old a piece of art is.
If you know specifics about it, please enlighten me.
If this is the case, please let my operator know at w:en: User talk: Hersfold. Hola Killiondude: Quería hacerte una consulta, vi que cambiaste mi perfil de usuario de "ninguno" a "autopatrulleros"... ¿Donde se puede chequear que tipo de perfil tiene uno? :-( Pues, tenemos un systema nuevo donde personas con un perfil de usuario "patroller" puede marcar los ediciones de paginas como "patrolled".
Los que no son "patrolled" tiene un exclamativo rojo. Es una cosa para cortar la lista de usuarios que "patrollers" necesiten ver (para luchar vandalismo). When you changed my user rights last year, rollback was familiar to me but autopatrol was not.
Another is the meta data at the bottom claimed it was taken two years later, and that two years later data matches up with the image that was correctly uploaded from flickr, thus the old one was deleted as a copyvio (as it did not contribute to the proper author) and the one with the correct information stayed.