Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2008 March 21



Image:Junoon3.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 ⚡  18:37, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

The source of the photo has no mention of the Creative Commons license, which the uploader claims it is licensed under. — BlueAzure (talk) 02:16, 21 March 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:VIA Hra.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 ⚡  18:37, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

The image is tagged as only requiring attribution, which is what the source site says. It is unlikely that the site actually is the copyright holder for the photo and therefore has the right to license the photo. Most of the photos that I saw on the site were PR photos. The site does not say who the copyright holder is for photos, so it is impossible to tell if they are the copyright holder of a photo on their site. Here is the page were the photo came from, the copyright holder is not listed and the photo looks like a publicity photo. — BlueAzure (talk) 02:26, 21 March 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:Hersfold.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. 

Deleted - A direct violation of UN rules, see http://www.un.org/depts/dhl/maplib/docs/stsgb132.pdf → Aza Toth 23:54, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I believe the Star Trek insignia is under copyright. — Powers T 11:05, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Agree, I think. I have no proof though.  WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN  tell me a joke...  18:50, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Image:Starfleet command emblem.png, which contains a similar symbol, is copyrighted, so you do have a point. The image needs cleanup anyway - would a self-generated look-alike be sufficiently different to spare deletion? If so, I can delete the current revision once the new one is up. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 00:52, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Not sure, sorry... WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN tell me a joke...  22:32, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Alright - I don't dispute that the current version probably should be deleted, but I will try to work on a newer version that hopefully will be acceptable. I'll post it up to have it checked over later tonight before I delete the current version. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 18:40, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Pictogram voting comment.svg|20px]] New version uploaded - The new version resembles, but does not duplicate, the Starfleet chevron. It is a self-generated look-alike using basic shapes that does not employ the characteristic curves, slant, or five-pointed star. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 19:37, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Not being an expert, I can't say if the new chevron is sufficiently different to avoid copyright/trademark problems. (Nice work though.)  I would suggest that you add a tag to the description page to cover the UN logo.  Not sure if that should be PD-UN, insignia, or something else, though.  Powers T 20:26, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I've added links to the UN flag and PD-UN - between the two, that should sort that out. I'll go ahead and delete the previous version of the image - if anyone wants to see it, I can e-mail you the old version. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 21:10, 24 March 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:Oyster card back small.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 as I5 by AnomieBOT ⚡  18:37, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Image of the back of an Oyster card containing logos that are subject to copyright — Million_Moments (talk) 11:16, 21 March 2008 (UTC).
 * Agreed, though I think a valid fair-use case could be made. Powers T 12:54, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm happy to change this and the other images to fair use, just had to make sure I was right first. Large number of images like this on articles. Million_Moments (talk) 10:41, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ resolved SkierRMH  ( talk ) 03:43, 15 April 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:38 McCarty.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 A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:37, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

uploader claims permission to use but no evidence of permission to release under a free license Genisock2 (talk) 13:27, 21 March 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:Sawao_Yamanaka_-_Delicious_Bump_Tour_in_USA_08.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 ⚡ 18:37, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Concernt Image Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:52, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * What exactly is your concern? Powers T 20:07, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I don't get it either. The last picture was poor quality and two years old; I just put in a newer and more clear picture. (That I took myself, so I know its source.) Cynic (talk) 22:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, No worries then... Feel free to de-tag Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:42, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ resolved SkierRMH  ( talk ) 03:45, 15 April 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:Mason Neck Satellite.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 ⚡  18:37, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Dubious claim of free-use: Claims to have been taken by user, but image is clearly from outer space and has been deleted twice before. VegitaU (talk) 20:02, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Response to dubious claim of free-use posted on the image description page. Picture is of a map and should never be deleted again. ابو منية (talk) 13:48, 22 March 2008 (UTC)Abu Munya
 * Response: Then, picture violates NFC rule #3 for unacceptable images - scanning a map. -- VegitaU (talk) 20:10, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The image is on Commons, so it's kind of moot, isn't it? Powers T 20:37, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ commons showing through. SkierRMH  ( talk ) 03:45, 15 April 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:Ufalcons.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 ⚡ 18:37, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Logo of an aerobatic display team, uploader unlikely to hold copyright. <b style="color:green;">Polly</b> (<b style="color:red;">Parrot</b>) 20:41, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * This image fits under the PD-UA-exempt licence, please read section (d):
 * "(d) State symbols of Ukraine, government awards; symbols and signs of government authorities, the Armed Forces of Ukraine and other military formations; symbols of territorial communities; symbols and signs of enterprises, institutions and organizations;"
 * As such, it qualifies under the PD-UA-exempt licence. —dima/talk/ 20:59, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅license & fur added. SkierRMH  ( talk ) 03:47, 15 April 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:01622200.JPG
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color:#f3f9ff; margin:1em 0 0 0; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #aaa;">
 * 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: moved to April 28 for more discussion time. -Nv8200p talk 14:09, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Since the image was taken in 1937 it seems very unlikely it was taken by the wikipedian who uploaded it — Million_Moments (talk) 21:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC).
 * Which copyright law applies? The picture was taken in Munkatch, which was then in Czechoslovakia (which no longer exists), and is now in the Ukraine.  Do the laws of Czechoslovakia's successor states apply (and what if they differ?), or is the applicable law that of the country now ruling Munkatch?  Does an image's copyright status change if the place where it was taken moves from one country to another?


 * Then again, I have no idea where the newspaper in which the picture first appeared was published. Perhaps the place where it was published is now in the Czech Republic.  Unless the original uploader is still around and can tell us which newspaper he scanned it from, we may never know that.


 * In any case, if it is Ukraine law that matters, then PD-Ukraine should apply, since the creator is not known. If Czech or Slovak law, then it's Anonymous-EU.  Either way it's PD.


 * And don't discount the possibility that the uploader may in fact be the copyright holder, just as he claims. He could be the original photographer, now in his 90s, or he could be the photographer's heir. -- Zsero (talk) 05:42, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:Munkacs benes.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 I3 by AnomieBOT ⚡  18:37, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Image taken to long ago for uploaded to be copyright holder — Million_Moments (talk) 21:24, 21 March 2008 (UTC).
 * As above, except that the picture may not even have been taken in Munkatch. Did Benes visit Munkach, or did the Minchas Elozor go to Prague to see him?  -- Zsero (talk) 05:43, 23 March 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.
 * 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:Small hollowrock.gif
<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 I4 by AnomieBOT ⚡  18:37, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Claims to be a promotional image but released under PD-self. No evidence that uploader owns copyright. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 21:27, 21 March 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:Hollowrock.gif.gif
<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 I4 by AnomieBOT ⚡  18:37, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Duplicate of Image:Small hollowrock.gif, which is claimed as a promotional photo. Still no evidence that it was uploaded by copyright holder. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 21:28, 21 March 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.