Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2007 December 17



Image:Gustavo1.JPG

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Improper source. Incorrect license. No fair-use rationale. 156.34.211.133 (talk) 07:06, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:Sudi_Ishwara.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as I4 by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Need better evidence of the GFDL claim. Jusjih (talk) 03:18, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:WVSP.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Claimed CC not found from the source site. OTRS confirmation? Jusjih (talk) 03:21, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:Kimveer.Knife.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Questionable GFDL-self claim. Jusjih (talk) 03:22, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:Kimveer2.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Questionable GFDL-self claim. Jusjih (talk) 03:23, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:Kimveer.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the discussion was: Keep; file is tagged as non-free.- F ASTILY  (TALK) 22:13, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Questionable GFDL-self claim. Jusjih (talk) 03:23, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Changed to fair use (not by me). MECU ≈ talk 14:10, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This image is currently tagged as non-free. If there is a dispute with the rationale, please tag the image with dfu or list it at WP:Non-free content review. AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:Kimveer.Gun2.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Questionable GFDL-self claim. Jusjih (talk) 03:23, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:Kimveer.Gun.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Questionable GFDL-self claim. Jusjih (talk) 03:24, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:City_of_Kragujevac.png

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Uploader claimed GFDL-self then blanked it. Need comments. Jusjih (talk) 03:33, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Looks professional, so I'm guessing it was never GFDL to begin with. I'm deleting. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:29, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:Nuhlogo.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as I5 by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Uploader claimed to be the copyright holder of the logo, but better evidence is needed. Jusjih (talk) 04:11, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:JohnMay1974.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Claimed to be used by permission. Image was deleted as copyvio at the commons. If there is a "permission", what does it say, who is it from, and where's the OTRS ticket number? Lupo 07:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I didn't upload this, but am trying to find out about the permission. I have reason to believe that this upload is not related to the one at Commons which was uploaded by a different user, please hold off on deletion for now.  R. Baley (talk) 18:04, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe. In light of Special:Undelete/Image:Admrlwillis.jpg I'm not so sure. (That image was uploaded by the same user as the one at Commons, and then by the uploader of this image here, within hours.) The uploader at the Commons, User:Sixstring1965, is an indefinitely blocked user and sockpuppeteer (both here and at the Commons); see here. In view of this, I think we would need a very clear OTRS permission... Lupo 22:59, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I deleted it because there is no OTRS ticket number and no way to verify the permission. If anyone verifies it, contact me and I will undelete. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:GUnit.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Highly unlikely it was taken by the uploader considering he also claimed to have owned this Getty image: Image:Will Smith4.jpg. The uploader has also uploaded fake album covers: Image:Shoot To Kill.jpg, Image:Eminem King Mathers.jpg, Image:Before I Self Destruct.jpg. Also, the low resolution and lack of metadata leads me to believe this is a copyvio. — Spellcast (talk) 09:53, 17 December 2007 (UTC).
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:Ducati-900SS.jpg‎

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as I7 by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

The uploader claims to be the copyright holder, since the photo is a studio promotional still the copyright holder should either be Ducati or the photographer. The low resolution and lack of metadata leads me to believe the uploader is neither. — Chris Ssk (talk) 11:14, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:Ducati.jpg‎

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as I9 by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

The uploader claims to be the copyright holder, since the photo is a studio promotional still the copyright holder should either be Ducati or the photographer. The low resolution and lack of metadata leads me to believe the uploader is neither. — Chris Ssk (talk) 11:14, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:Valérie Quennessen as Princess Yasimina in CONAN THE BARBARIAN.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Listing here now as I wasn't aware of this place previously; this was listed earlier today at WP:CP for 2007 December 17. This image was tagged PD-Self by, whom gives themselves as the source. I suspect that the user in question is not the source, and that this should not only be tagged as Fair Use, but reviewed to determine its suitability to remain on the project. I left a message for the user here earlier, and have left an addendum to advise of this new listing of the image.
 * Resolved: This image was deleted by an administrator as at 02:25, 18 December 2007, following the listing at WP:CP. Also, apologies for forgetting to sign this entry originally. &mdash; digital eon  &bull; talk @ 03:02, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:Valérie Quennessen as Princess Yasimina in CONAN THE BARBARIAN2.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Listing here now as I wasn't aware of this place previously; this was listed earlier today at WP:CP for 2007 December 17. This image was tagged PD-Self by, whom gives themselves as the source. I suspect that the user in question is not the source, and that this should not only be tagged as Fair Use, but reviewed to determine its suitability to remain on the project. I left a message for the user here earlier, and have left an addendum to advise of this new listing of the image.
 * Resolved: This image was deleted by an administrator as at 02:25, 18 December 2007, following the listing at WP:CP. Also, apologies for forgetting to sign this entry originally. &mdash; digital eon  &bull; talk @ 03:02, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:Valérie Quennessen as Princess Yasimina in CONAN THE BARBARIAN3.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Listing here now as I wasn't aware of this place previously; this was listed earlier today at WP:CP for 2007 December 17. This image was tagged PD-Self by, whom gives themselves as the source. I suspect that the user in question is not the source, and that this should not only be tagged as Fair Use, but reviewed to determine its suitability to remain on the project. I left a message for the user here earlier, and have left an addendum to advise of this new listing of the image.
 * Resolved: This image was deleted by an administrator as at 02:25, 18 December 2007, following the listing at WP:CP. Also, apologies for forgetting to sign this entry originally. &mdash; digital eon  &bull; talk @ 03:02, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:Valérie Quennessen as Princess Yasimina in CONAN THE BARBARIAN4.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Listing here now as I wasn't aware of this place previously; this was listed earlier today at WP:CP for 2007 December 17. This image was tagged PD-Self by, whom gives themselves as the source. I suspect that the user in question is not the source, and that this should not only be tagged as Fair Use, but reviewed to determine its suitability to remain on the project. I left a message for the user here earlier, and have left an addendum to advise of this new listing of the image.
 * Resolved: This image was deleted by an administrator as at 02:25, 18 December 2007, following the listing at WP:CP. Also, apologies for forgetting to sign this entry originally. &mdash; digital eon  &bull; talk @ 03:02, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:1982-sapporo-turbo.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Claimed "free use" for publicity photo, has (c) Mitsubishi logo, no OTRS proof of claims made by uploader, easily replaceable with photo that does not have (c) concerns. — SkierRMH  ( talk ) 20:23, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

What does OTRS mean?

>>Quoting SkierRMH "4) Uploader GalantFan has been asked to prove "I got permission..." claims ... but has not done so"

Not only did I get permission, but I even told you who I got it from and gave you his contact details. This included permission to post them on other websites. If you need more permission to use the images for commercial purposes, then contact him yourself and ask for it before you delete them. Or if you want me to contact him again and ask if they may be reproduced for commercial purposes, I will do that.GalantFan (talk) 23:56, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Currently waiting for reply from Andy regarding commercial purposes. GalantFan (talk) 01:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

And for that matter, it sure is not easily replaceable. Believe me I have tried. What few of these cars are left have almost all been modified with custom wheels, etc, or are in generally shoddy and non-photogenic condition.GalantFan (talk) 00:02, 18 December 2007 (UTC)


 * N.B. GalantFan has been informed on how to obtain the OTRS and has yet done so. Claims of "I got permission" need to be proven via official route - and it's the uploader's responsibility to do so, not anyone else's. SkierRMH ( talk ) 08:45, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

GalantFan has not even been informed what "OTRS" is. If you are talking about this OTRS, I can't imagine what it has to do with anything. GalantFan (talk) 17:52, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

If this is what you mean, OTRS, no, I sure have not been informed what you expect. Something to do with email? GalantFan (talk) 18:03, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * See Instructions on permissions are found on . SkierRMH  ( talk ) 22:51, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

//////////////

Current status of this issue. I did indeed receive permission directly from Andy W. to use these images here and on other websites. Most recent news on the issue:
 * "I have received a separate email from Wikipedia direct and am pursuing the copyright issue with them and our legal team.
 * Regards,
 * Andy"

GalantFan (talk) 03:23, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Update for admins - it has been over a month and there still is no OTRS filed for this image. Claim of "I got permission" has not been substantiated in the required manner.  SkierRMH  ( talk ) 17:27, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

-- Delete. Same as image below. Can be restored when/of OTRS permission comes through. Garion96 (talk) 18:07, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:1976 Sapporo 2000 GSR.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Claimed "free use" for publicity photo, has (c) Mitsubishi logo, no OTRS proof of claims made by uploader, easily replaceable with photo that does not have (c) concerns. — SkierRMH  ( talk ) 20:23, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree that this image and the one above it are not free and should go. See Fair_use_review for details. – Quadell (talk) (random) 20:50, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

See my comment above. GalantFan (talk) 23:59, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Update for admins - it has been over a month and there still is no OTRS filed for this image. Claim of "I got permission" has not been substantiated in the required manner.  SkierRMH  ( talk ) 17:27, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:Alb2370.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the discussion was: Keep; file is tagged as non-free.- F ASTILY  (TALK) 22:14, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

I doubt that the uploader is the author of this album cover. — 88.134.141.133 (talk) 21:21, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Now fair use (not by me). MECU ≈ talk 14:11, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This image is currently tagged as non-free. If there is a dispute with the rationale, please tag the image with dfu or list it at WP:Non-free content review. AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Images by User:Adrian1992
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the discussion was: Deleted- F ASTILY  (TALK) 22:14, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

User uploaded several album covers and other images claiming that he is the copyright holder, which is highly unlikely

This includes
 * Image:Dia Especial Cover.jpg
 * Image:ANIMAL CITY.jpg
 * Image:Las de la Intuicion Cover.jpg
 * Image:Front cover of DELL Los Exitos.jpg
 * Image:Alone in the world cover.jpg
 * Image:LIFE IS A SONG.jpg
 * Image:THIRD CHANCE COVER.jpg
 * Image:Rebelde Cast.jpg
 * Image:Inalcanzable singles cover.jpg
 * Image:Inalcanzable singles cover small.jpg
 * Image:Play MX foto1.jpg
 * Image:Cd cover play mx.jpg
 * Image:Si Te Vas.jpg
 * Image:Johnson Anjelah 7842.jpg
 * Image:936529538 3a3665e035.jpg

Some of those could maybe be used as fair use. — 88.134.141.133 (talk) 21:29, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * On Image:ANIMAL CITY.jpg the uploader stated something like "My own CD cover" which is why they put self. All these should be changed to fair use with a rationale provided. MECU ≈ talk 14:13, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- lucasbfr  talk 17:55, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:PAFfalcons.JPG
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as I7 by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Tagged as both fair use and GFDL. The description says that it is promotional. I suspect that this image is non-free and it fails WP:NFCC (significance) —Remember the dot (talk) 21:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)


 * i would kindly request the Wikipedia authority to keep this image at the Pakistan Air force article and i allow them for a proper use of it under any license they want it to be in!
 * but i want my image to be present there!thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paki90 (talk • contribs) 18:30, 27 December 2007
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:Sophia.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as F8 by A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

The claimed permission does not include commercial uses, so not good enough with GFDL unless fair use can be claimed. Jusjih (talk) 22:52, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Keep -- There is no fair usage claim. I have a license to redistribute (including explicitly to wikipedia), and I'm granting the license to redistribute under the same terms to wikipedia. Hence wikipedia has a valid license to redistribute under the terms of the license. There is not nor have I ever made a fair usage claim. This is usage with specific permission. jbolden1517<sup style="color:darkgreen;">Talk 16:56, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia only accepts images where the license permits commercial reuse and derivative works. The text of the permission on the image description page specifically disallows commercial reuse, which is not permitted.  If the copyright holder is willing to provide the image under a free license, such as the GFDL, please have him/her send a letter of permission to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.  You can see a sample letter of permission at COPYREQ. If he/she is not willing to provide it under a GFDL-compatible license, it's not considered a "free" license for Wikipedia purposes.  Commons:Licensing gives more details on licensing information. --B (talk) 20:19, 20 December 2007 (UTC)


 * OK that makes more sense. I've thought about this.  It really depends on how wikipedia sees itself with regard to wikipedia text.  If it sees itself as the only person with standing with regard to the article (as opposed to the individual components of the article) then it can legally combine a GFDL work with a non GFDL work (the same way a copyright holder for a GFDL work could).  That would create a work that no one could redistribute but wikipedia would still be able to distribute.  IANAL, but this does seem messy at best.  OK go ahead and delete.  However, my comment that there was no fair usage claim stands.  Original lister   jbolden1517<sup style="color:darkgreen;">Talk  13:30, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:Dance For Destruction.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Image description says this is a promo shot but uploader added GFDL-self license tags. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:47, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

i am in the band and we took the shot ourselves, we are leaving it for the use of anyone, i dont really know whats up with disputing this? we took it we are releasing it. ean of dance for destruction
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:Lhsmulesfb.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as I9 by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Appears to be a team logo but tagged with PD release. Doubtful whether uploader is the copyright holder. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:52, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:Leilehuamules.JPG
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as I9 by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Appears to be a team badge but tagged with PD release. Doubtful whether uploader is the copyright holder. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:54, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.