Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 June 23



File:Erfenschnergen-trip.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 ⚡  02:08, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Picture uploaded buy user for a personal vacation schedule. It has no value to the project. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Snottywong/trip. Adam in MO Talk 01:36, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as the map is probably copyrighted. Stifle (talk) 08:20, 6 July 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:PinterDavidBaron.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. 

Wrong forum. Image is marked as copyrighted and this is not disputed. Correct forum for this is WP:FFD. Note that the complainant is currently blocked/banned and further debate is unlikely - Peripitus (Talk) 05:49, 4 July 2009 (UTC) Fair Use rationale disputed NYScholar (talk) 05:39, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


 * There is no identification of the copyright holder of this photograph or identification of the photographer or initial place of publication. It is not clear that this photograph is being used "within fair use" or that the claim that it is "a unique historic image" is accurate (there are others of Harold Pinter when he was using the name David Baron).  This image comes from a copyrighted and copyright-protected official website of the subject Harold Pinter (currently owned and maintained by his estate and controlled by his agent, Judy Daish and Associates); please see: Talk:Harold Pinter and the uploader's talk page for further discussion. --NYScholar (talk) 04:40, 23 June 2009 (UTC) (edited. --NYScholar (talk) 07:23, 23 June 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. Otherwise, unless there is another reason for listing here, the listing will be closed by an administrator and the image kept. AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:55, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


 * The source link is clearly shown in the Image Summary. The fair use rationale satisfies our non-free image policies.  There are no known free images of Pinter from the 1950s.  -- Ssilvers (talk) 13:30, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

As requested by this Bot (whom/which I took to be an administrator), I have added the template I was directed to (a subst one) when I tried to add. The first one (puic) is no longer on the file image page. --NYScholar (talk) 22:17, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

That template was removed by an actual person; I have followed that person's suggestion and posted the concerns in another review page. --NYScholar (talk) 00:07, 24 June 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:UM infrared comparison.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 ⚡  04:08, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

As far as I am aware, the Met Office does not release its content under a free license. J Milburn (talk) 09:47, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note the image does not originate from the Met Office, although weather data used in the creation of the image did originate from the Met Office. If I said "The Met Office predicted rain today" would I be breaking licensing rules, because that phrase was based upon Met Office data -- I honestly don't know what the rules are. Rnt20 (talk) 19:25, 23 June 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. Otherwise, unless there is another reason for listing here, the listing will be closed by an administrator and the image kept. AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:55, 23 June 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:Walter Bread 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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons, please nominate it for deletion there if you feel it is non-free. AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:55, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Company logo, licenced as the user's own work. Jafeluv (talk) 12:40, 23 June 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:Cllr.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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons, please nominate it for deletion there if you feel it is non-free. AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:55, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Company logo, licenced as the user's own work. Jafeluv (talk) 12:40, 23 June 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:Metrocrash.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 ⚡  12:06, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Gawker text is free, but its images are not explicitly free. See this - "Important Note: this does not include the right to republish images from GM sites, for which GM may not the copyright holder, except in the context of a screenshot of the whole site." Copyright status is thus unknown, image should be deleted. Vicenarian (T · C) 17:10, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, Well forget a picture then mark it for deletion. We will never find one for this article then. ZStoler (talk) 17:13, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * You can still do fair use though. I believe this applies. Calebrw (talk) 17:19, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Problem with fair use is that we'd first have to establish the ultimate copyright holder. Since Gawker may not be, and doesn't identify who is, it doesn't appear we can establish this. Also, we should be able to find a free photo eventually. A survivor or a witness will likely upload a photo or two over the next few days. Vicenarian  (T · C) 17:35, 23 June 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:Sedona-sm.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 ⚡  02:08, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Photo of 3D artwork - No indication of artwork status Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:47, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * My own photo of a public sculpture installed c. 1993. No knowledge of any restrictions on photography of this artwork. Lee M (talk) 03:26, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * That means the artwork is copyrighted, and US freedom of panorama is buildings only. This will have to go, I'm afraid. Stifle (talk) 22:25, 4 July 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:Trinity_Thunderbolts.gif

 * 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 ⚡  02:08, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Sports logo- No indication uploader has rights Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:42, 23 June 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:Ghsmain.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 ⚡  02:08, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Just because it's in the .us top-level domain doesn't make it a work of the federal government; listing here because I'm not sure what kind of copyright rules govern the work of North Carolina school districts. (ESkog)(Talk) 21:45, 23 June 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:Ghswhirlie.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 ⚡  02:08, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Same as above, tagged as PD-USGov but actually the work of a school district in North Carolina. (ESkog)(Talk) 21:46, 23 June 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:Cyclepaths_Vendée.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 ⚡  02:08, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Non US Road sign design - No FoP in France? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:04, 23 June 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:TO-Team-Manager.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 ⚡  17:59, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

reason Highwayman101 (talk) 00:01, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Quote from the privacy section on NDS:

Copyright Notice

The material featured on this site is subject to Crown copyright protection unless otherwise indicated. The Crown copyright protected material (other than the Royal Arms, the Central Office of Information logo and departmental or agency logos) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium for research, private study or for internal circulation within an organisation.
 * 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:Anti-China march routes.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. 

This image is claimed to be self-made, but it looks too professional for it to be so. It's more likely that it was the product of the protest organizers, which was subsequently scanned. Ngchen (talk) 00:05, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Deleted the disputed file and replaced by an external reference showing the same thing.--Jusjih (talk) 18:15, 13 July 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.