Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2008 December 25



File:Taposbd.JPG

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 ⚡  14:30, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Photo of a living person, fair use does not apply. Little Red Riding Hood  talk  00:23, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

GFDL fair use, Infobox description
It has been used as fair use for the article Fazle Noor Taposh, It can be verified easily from his official website's mail www.sheikhnoor.com Abdullah Harun Jewel (talk) 00:55, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * That website says that the image can be used for fair use?  Little Red Riding Hood  talk  01:03, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The website says "Copyright @ All Rights Reserved By: www.sheikhnoor.com & www.vote4taposh.com".   Little Red Riding Hood  talk  01:04, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * This image is fair use and as such is out of scope here. However, it is both orphaned, lacks a rationale, and is probably replaceable, so I have tagged it as such. Stifle (talk) 11:22, 29 December 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.

File:Pitchlogo.gif

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 ⚡  08:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

orphaned, appears to be derivative of Nottingham Outlaws logo Skier Dude  ( talk ) 06:20, 25 December 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.

File:Pplogo.png

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 ⚡  08:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

orphaned, target article doesn't exist Pixel Projects; if corporate logo, then uploader would not be (c) holder Skier Dude  ( talk ) 06:23, 25 December 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.

File:ChALogo.gif

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 ⚡  03:25, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

appears to be governmental logo, thus not PD, no source given Skier Dude  ( talk ) 06:32, 25 December 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.

File:Fabrika2008.JPG

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 ⚡  03:25, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Maybe a poster like in here Sdrtirs (talk) 11:15, 25 December 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.

File:Bpdaniel.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 ⚡  00:47, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Low res, posed shot with no meta-data. User has uploaded other suspicious images for the same article. J Milburn (talk) 12:47, 25 December 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.

File:Ali-Moeen-Writer4.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 ⚡  20:35, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Strange border, low res, no meta-data, posed. I doubt the uploader owns the rights to this image. J Milburn (talk) 14:35, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * There's an email in the photo submission OTRS queue about this picture. It's a bit confusing, but I'm going to try sorting it out so that we can keep this picture. Do not delete this before then. Raul654 (talk) 17:07, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Can we get a ticket# for this? Or an update at least? Stifle (talk) 11:55, 16 January 2009 (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.

File:Ali-Moeen-Writer3.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 ⚡  20:35, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Part of a batch of suspicious images. No meta-data. I doubt the uploader owns the rights to this image. J Milburn (talk) 14:36, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Per above, do not delete this picture until I'm done with it on OTRS. Raul654 (talk) 17:14, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Can we get a ticket# for this? Or an update at least? Stifle (talk) 11:55, 16 January 2009 (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.

File:ABB.gif

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 ⚡  08:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

orphaned, appears to be corporate logo, source & target article not provided Skier Dude  ( talk ) 18:03, 25 December 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.

File:Albumthumb2.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 ⚡  08:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

claims to be album cover for Uphollow therefore uploader would not be (c) holder Skier Dude  ( talk ) 18:06, 25 December 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.

File:Cal.png

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 ⚡  03:25, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

derivative of University of California, Berkeley logo Skier Dude  ( talk ) 18:10, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Too simple for copyright, per PD-textlogo. IronGargoyle (talk) 03:34, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Image is orphaned and Wikipedia is not a file storage site, also there may be other considerations protecting this image, such as trademarks and design patents as it is a logo. Look at the bottom right hand of the image and you will see either a (tm) or (r) in the image. Given these problems & the image is not used, no need to keep it. Skier Dude  ( talk ) 19:34, 4 January 2009 (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.

File:Calibre Records Logo .jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 G6 by AnomieBOT ⚡  03:25, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

orphaned, claims to be record label logo, therefore uploader not (c) holder Skier Dude  ( talk ) 18:14, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Too simple for copyright, per PD-textlogo. IronGargoyle (talk) 03:36, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Image is orphaned and Wikipedia is not a file storage site, also there may be other considerations protecting this image, such as trademarks and design patents as it is a logo. Given these problems & the image is not used, no need to keep it. Skier Dude  ( talk ) 19:35, 4 January 2009 (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.

File:Casualwishearlyep.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 ⚡  08:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

claims to be album cover, therefore uploader would not be (c) holder Skier Dude  ( talk ) 18:15, 25 December 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.

File:Duracraft.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 ⚡  08:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

orphaned, claims to be album cover, therefore uploader would not be (c) holder Skier Dude  ( talk ) 18:22, 25 December 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.

File:BaldwinBros.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 ⚡  04:25, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

the second image in the montage is unfree and the images included in the license don't have compatible licenses Spartaz Humbug! 18:54, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * see also drv discussion Spartaz Humbug! 18:56, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete due to license incompatibility, but replace with some form of Multiple image wizardry. Stifle (talk) 11:20, 29 December 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.

File:WithBella.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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. 

Result was keep. delldot  &nabla;.  23:21, 3 February 2009 (UTC) no evidence this was not renewed. Garion96 (talk) 23:09, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * This photo not renewed per Catalog of Copyright Entries - have reviewed photo entries for entire decade. It was taken early 1940's.Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 04:06, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Reasonable due diligence to verify lack of renewal. IronGargoyle (talk) 03:31, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per above..Modernist (talk) 14:52, 18 January 2009 (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.

File:With_Warner.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) 01:47, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

need to be a little bit more certain that copyright hasn't been renewed. Garion96 (talk) 23:15, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Taken 1927 - copyright, even if renewed, would have expired.Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 04:02, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The cut off year for that is 1923, not 1927. Garion96 (talk) 21:37, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Should I plan a library trip to make sure it wasn't renewed in 1955?Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 07:14, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm closing this as . While I'm aware that there's a bit of a hole in verifying that the copyright hasn't been renewed, it would be better for a discussion around the topic to be more centralized and get proper coverage and input from editors. Stifle (talk) 12:49, 16 February 2009 (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 ⚡ 01:29, 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.

File:Jolson-Korea.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 ⚡ 01:29, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

need to be a little bit more certain that copyright hasn't been renewed. Garion96 (talk) 23:16, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * This might actually be public domain if it's taken by US military. Any source on that? Garion96 (talk) 23:25, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * There is an identical image in the same publication as File:Wife.jpg. It was taken around the same time. No renewal listed and the military source of the image is presumed from Youtube videos showing his performaces with only military photographers around.Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 03:59, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Reasonable due diligence to verify lack of renewal. Also, very likely to be US Military public domain image. IronGargoyle (talk) 03:29, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Am still not that convinced, also when looking at editor's previously deleted images. Same for the other images listed here. Also, very like public domain /= public domain. Garion96 (talk) 21:34, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Photo info revised to PD per comments.Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 07:10, 31 December 2008 (UTC)


 * per above. Stifle (talk) 12:49, 16 February 2009 (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.

File:AlvinPlayhouse.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 ⚡ 01:29, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

need to be a little bit more certain that copyright hasn't been renewed. Garion96 (talk) 23:17, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * resized per tagWikiwatcher1 (talk) 03:57, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * This news photo is dated 1946 and was a typical news image with no artistic reason to renew its copyright. My understanding is of the millions of news photos taken, few are considered for special treatment allowing for renewal.  Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 19:13, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't be too sure about that. I assume (don't know for certain) that press agencies are pretty good with that. It is their income after all. Garion96 (talk) 21:29, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I've gone through a lot of issues of Catalog of Copyright Entries, - Works of Art (incl. "Photographic Works; Prints, and Pictorial Illustrations) and noted that about 2% of actual filed copyrights for photos were renewed. And the "actual filed" copyrights were only a tiny fraction of all newspaper photos published (probably over a million per year).  The news photos relied on "common law" copyright notices for protection.  For the year 1974, when this image's copyright would have had to be renewed, there were about 50 entries, and this was not one of them. In fact, I can upload a photocopy of the title page to that edition if you want. With odds of 50 to 1,000,000, you can be pretty sure no copyrights are being infringed. Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 22:08, 30 December 2008 (UTC)


 * per above. Stifle (talk) 12:49, 16 February 2009 (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.

File:Heart_of_NY.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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. 

need to be a little bit more certain that copyright hasn't been renewed. Garion96 (talk) 23:17, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Movie with this title never made and the poster has no copyright notice. It was a test poster before the movie, under a different title, was issued. This particular poster was never used.Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 04:01, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. It was published without a copyright notice before 1978 and therefore in public domain per PD-pre1978. Renewal is not relevant. IronGargoyle (talk) 03:23, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Stifle (talk) 11:57, 16 January 2009 (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.

File:Marshall-giving-medal-of-merit.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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. 

need to be a little bit more certain that copyright hasn't been renewed. Garion96 (talk) 23:18, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Same explantion for File:Wife.jpgWikiwatcher1 (talk) 03:41, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Reasonable due diligence to verify lack of renewal. IronGargoyle (talk) 03:27, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Stifle (talk) 11:58, 16 January 2009 (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.

File:Wife.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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. 

Result was keep. delldot  &nabla;.  23:32, 3 February 2009 (UTC) need to be a little bit more certain that copyright hasn't been renewed. Garion96 (talk) 23:21, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Image was scanned from “The Real Story of Al Jolson” (1950) Spectrolux Corp. This publication was a specialty one-off life story of Jolson published shortly after his death for newsstand-type distribution.  It is in magazine format (I have a copy).  There is no indication that it was ever reprinted and is currently not available except as a collectable.  I have also gone through the Catalog of Copyright Entries for most of the decade of the 1970's, in the "Works of Art" category, which includes "Photographic Works," etc. and there were no Jolson photos with renewed copyrights.  In any case, I believe the copyright of the photo would have expired even if it were renewed.Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 02:56, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Reasonable due diligence to verify lack of renewal. IronGargoyle (talk) 03:26, 27 December 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.