Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2008 March 28



Image:Footdoc.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 ⚡  01:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

User has long history of uploading copyvio images as PD-Self. Picture is lacking a description. — (EhJJ)TALK 01:11, 28 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:von_einem_airstrip_road.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 ⚡  01:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Uploader has stated the image is scanned from a book, but has then asserted GFDL licensing — Kevin (talk) 01:30, 28 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:Tnp.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 A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Tagged with both and. If the uploader has the authority to release this image into the public domain, then the tag should be removed (and probably replaced with [[:Category:Screenshots of web pages]]). —Bkell (talk) 03:15, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * If the user has authority over the website, the best thing is for him/her to post the screenshot on the website's server and release it into the public domain there. Then, it can be uploaded to Wikipedia/Commons as a public domain image. (EhJJ)TALK 15:25, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * will do. Dan Knauss (talk) 19:11, 21 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:Von einem home.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 ⚡  01:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Uploader has stated the image is scanned from a book, but has then asserted GFDL licensing Kevin (talk) 07:35, 28 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:171450.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 ⚡  01:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Appears to be a publicity still from a film. Uploader unlikely to be copyright holder. Kelly hi! 11:27, 28 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:13006_112010507284.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 ⚡  01:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

no clear release or statment this is an image of the government from source website, a police photo is not a work of the federal government MECU ≈ talk 13:50, 28 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:Anima283.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 ⚡  01:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Appears to be a screencap or scan. Kelly hi! 15:02, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * License changed to non-free television screenshot, flagged with {{subst:nsd}}. Kelly  hi! 19:42, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Deferred to I4 deletion in a week. Stifle (talk) 13:49, 17 May 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:Froylan_Ledezma.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 ⚡  01:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

No evidence permission was given to release image under the GFDL. Nv8200p talk 17:52, 28 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:Geert_Wilders.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 AnomieBOT ⚡  01:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

According to Commons:User:Bryan, an admin at Wikimedia Commons, the free license at Dutch Wikipedia is not sufficient. Kelly  hi! 21:09, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * In any case, it is a duplicate of Commons:Image:Geert Wilders CZ.jpg, which is up for deletion there. Kelly  hi! 21:30, 28 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:Shaki-dasilvano-9_28.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 ⚡  01:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Uploader seems to have simply tagged all his uploads as "self-made" regardles (including album covers), with a mostly empty information template I'm not overly convicend this photo is his own creation either. Sherool (talk) 22:16, 28 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:Motel.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 A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Uploader seems to have simply tagged all his uploads as "self-made" regardles (including album covers), with a mostly empty information template I'm not overly convicend this photo is his own creation either. Sherool (talk) 22:17, 28 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:Cibula.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 ⚡  01:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Uploader seems to have simply tagged all his uploads as "self-made" regardles (including album covers), with a mostly empty information template I'm not overly convicend this photo is his own creation either. Sherool (talk) 22:19, 28 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:Labradoodle 1.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 ⚡  01:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

looks suspiciously professional, may be from a studio Samuell Lift me up or put me down 22:48, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Of course its professional. It was a 9.99 photo taken at PetCo during the holidays. --Endless Dan 03:54, 29 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:OmPuff.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 ⚡  01:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Appears to have been scanned from a magazine or simmilar printed material (possebly a cover), suspect the uploader did not photograph this himself. Sherool (talk) 23:35, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree.  Puffin  Let's talk! 23:07, 24 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.