Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2008 August 19



Image:FleaandCobain1992.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media 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: Wrong forum, image is obviously unfree. Sending to IfD. -- Kelly hi! 17:23, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Not from a video. This is a promo pic. Endless Dan 17:49, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Does it matter if it is a promo pic? The image has a fair use rationale. I can't understand listing it on "possibly unfree images"; of course it is unfree, hence the fair use claim. It has the name of the photographer (Kevin Mazur) and the name of the copyright holder (Warner Bros.) and it has a rationale. The music video template license part can be removed, I agree, but the actual rationale given above that is perfectly fine.  naerii  17:55, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Naerii covered all my arguments. The image is quite obviously unfree. A template change is indeed in order, but nothing here will require significant action. NSR 77  T C  18:23, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think Endless was necessarily asking for this to be deleted rather he wanted the copyright info & sourcing to be corrected (as this explaination at the top says, "primary purpose of this page is to ascertain the source and/or copyright status of an image"), which is indeed important under our NFCC and should not be viewed as a minor issue. Be that as it may, the issue is now resolved so there's no need for further drama. Nil Einne (talk) 19:38, 20 August 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 media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section.

Image:Pit.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 ⚡  18:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Image is from smashbros.com, and Nintendo generally does not release pictures of its characters under free licenses. Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 02:04, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * If I know the source, I find it easier to just correct the license rather than mess with the PUI process. Still needs rationale, though.  Pagra shtak  13:14, 25 August 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:28-drkelikian med.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 ⚡  18:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Uploader is not the copyright holder. Corvus cornix talk  03:59, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

This pic is pre 1978 I put the wrong tag on.--Nickthearmenian12 (talk) 04:18, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * What is source of this image? Where's the proof it was released without a copyright notice? Nil Einne (talk) 17:39, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Exact same size image is on http://www.bobdole.org/ww2album/pages/28-drkelikian.html Image and copyright 1998-2008 Bob Dole Enterprises. MilborneOne (talk) 20:41, 30 August 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:Hampar Kelikian.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 ⚡  18:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Uploader is not copyright holder Corvus cornix  talk  04:00, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

This pic is pre 1978 I put the wrong tag on.--Nickthearmenian12 (talk) 04:17, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * See above Nil Einne (talk) 17:41, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Exact same size image is on http://www.bobdole.org/ww2album/pages/28-drkelikian.html Click to Enlarge Image and copyright 1998-2008 Bob Dole Enterprises. MilborneOne (talk) 20:44, 30 August 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:Trumpet1.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 ⚡  18:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Looks like a professional image. Uploader has a history of using improper copyright claims. Corvus cornix talk  04:02, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

This one I don't know, they aren't "improper copyright claims." The first two were just labeled wrong they are pre 1978. The trumpet one you can take off the site, im sorry about that one, shouldn't have uploaded it. Now that I know there is a commons or what ever it is called, I can get a pic of a trumpet. thank you--Nickthearmenian12 (talk) 04:22, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Not knowing there's a commons is no excuse for intentional violating copyright Nil Einne (talk) 17:40, 20 August 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:LenaYada.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 ⚡  18:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Looks like a publicity photo, dud source. Copyright tag was added after a bot tagged the image as having no license. I suspect the uploader is not the copyright holder. J Milburn (talk) 11:05, 19 August 2008 (UTC) Wrong! This Image is shot by a fan and not an official WWE Image or another copyright / trademark! It is allowed to link free (fan) Images!


 * It does not matter who shot the photograph, the copyright is held by them. As the image has not been released under any license this is a violation of CSD I9. –– Lid(Talk) 23:24, 22 August 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:Onesanparq.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 ⚡  18:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

The image lacks licensing information and there is no evidence that the uploader is the copyright holder (notice the watermark at the lower-right portion of the image. — Xeltran (talk) 11:24, 19 August 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:Robinsons cybergate bacolod.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 ⚡  18:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

The image lacks licensing information and there is no evidence that the uploader is the copyright holder; notice the watermark at the lower right portion of the image. — Xeltran (talk) 11:29, 19 August 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:Bacolodairport.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 ⚡  18:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

The image lacks licensing information and there is no evidence that the uploader is the copyright holder. Xeltran (talk) 11:35, 19 August 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:Kennet_uniform.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 I8 by A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

School Unifrom design presumably copyright to School concerned/ No indication of model release Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:14, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. The model release doesn't seem to be needed as the image seems to have been taken in a public place (brick wall, natural lighting). The uniform design itself seems pretty standard, functional and non-creative. I don't think it's actually copyrightable. The logo (see below) is a more interesting case. In this particular case I am not sure if the logo is really the subject of the shot and is enough for its presence to be anything more than incidental (like the Nike swoosh on Tiger Woods' shirt). That said, can anyone with a better understanding of British school systems elaborate on how closely they are tied to the government? The school was founded in 1957, which means that the logo (if it remained the same), would be beyond the 50 year max of crown copyright. IronGargoyle (talk) 18:40, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, but it looks like a staged photo. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:45, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Nothing makes it non-free. Wikipedia does not require model releases. Stifle (talk) 10:52, 30 August 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:Kennet_awards_and_shield.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 I8 by A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Logos.. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:20, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * See my comment above. I think this may possibly be an expired Crown copyright. IronGargoyle (talk) 19:26, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I guess there are other logos in the picture as well. A crop might be warranted if someone can answer my earlier question. IronGargoyle (talk) 21:10, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Logos aren't really a feature of the image. Stifle (talk) 13:05, 3 September 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:VDS_PRESS_SHOT.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 ⚡  18:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Unable to confirm CC/GFDL release or owner is uploader Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:30, 19 August 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:Chennai_Police_logo.gif

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media 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: kept with license updated Skier Dude  ( talk ) 02:15, 26 February 2012 (UTC) User unconfrimable as Police agency this is the logo for, no source - thus unable to confirm as GFDL (was perviously listed) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:34, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, this was selfmade indeed, but should have been under non-free logo. I had the wrong licence on!!! I have amended the licence. Wiki San Roze<i style="color:green;">†αLҝ</i> 15:15, 19 August 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 ⚡ 18:34, 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 media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section.

Image:IMG 0028.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 A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

License tag refers to previously uploaded image of different subject.

Older picture from Feb 2007 with comment (Uploading for temporary period ...) Q  T C 19:26, 19 August 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:Rodin_Portrait.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 ⚡  18:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Unused photo with ambiguous licensing. Kelly hi! 21:24, 19 August 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:Alex Shelley.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 ⚡  18:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

It looks more that is from a website. Sdrtirs (talk) 21:43, 19 August 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.