Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 April 9



File:Rentalpad.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 ⚡  02:42, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * File:Rentalpad.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Image includes a trademark claim and no fair use rational Eeekster (talk) 00:11, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment trademark claim does not necessarily equate to a need for a fair use rationale. Please do not confuse the two. — BQZip01 —  talk 04:24, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Image is copyrightable and is not used in any articles. This is a minor software program with little assertion of notability. — BQZip01 —  talk 04:24, 12 April 2010 (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:Josh Cody .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 discussion was: No Consensus; solution offered. -  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 05:12, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * File:Josh Cody .png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Appears to be a colorized version of the file here: http://grfx.cstv.com/schools/vand/graphics/auto/codyedit2.jpg

I can't find a colorized original, but I find it highly dubious that this image is claimed to be an original creation by the user since they were not alive when the subject of this image died. Terrillja talk  04:21, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Like you, I am uncertain of the origin of the the disputed colorized photo of Josh Cody. I can, however, tell you that the photo shows Cody in the World War I era uniform of a U.S. Army lieutenant. The First World War occurred between 1914 and 1918, and active American participation was limited to 1917 to 1918. Cody's biography (multiple sources) indicates that he served fromin the U.S. Army from 1917 to 1918 and returned to Vanderbilt in the fall of 1919 to complete his undergraduate degree and exhaust his college football eligibility. Given that the origin of this photo is clearly pre-1926, is there not some justification for using the photo, either in its original black-and-white format or its obviously colorized form, as being beyond the reachback of present copyright law? Your response and explanation would be helpful. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 05:03, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I have absolutely no knowledge of world war 1 uniforms and being out of the army does not mean that the image could not have been taken afterwards. Veterans are commonly photographed in their uniforms after their service.-- Terrillja talk  23:35, 9 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I found the photo a while ago it was a print I scanned it and colored it. I have asked the Vanderbilt sight for permission to use it they have not gotten back to me yet sorry for the mix-up.

I was not trying to fool anyone just trying to make the story a better one for people to enjoy it more. User:MDSanker —Preceding undated comment added 23:18, 9 April 2010 (UTC).


 * Keep Simple retag. Annotate the source of the image as PD and the process by which colorization was done under GDFL (i.e. photoshop, etc). — BQZip01 —  talk 04:26, 12 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I retaged it I removed the tag that was on it, I hope that is okay I was thinking this was good since you have keep on this photo. User:MDSanker talk
 * 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:5Portraits3.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 discussion was: No Consensus. -  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 05:11, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * File:5Portraits3.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Unclear copyright status; probably derivative works of copyrighted art. Blurpeace  05:24, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Walt Whitman died in 1892. While these appear to be more modern works, I see no evidence of their creation dates and could very easily be older works. As such, they may or may not fall under certain copyright statutes. I'm inclined to WP:AGF that these appear to be genuine, but I reserve the right to change my mind if I find them to be copyrighted after 1989. — BQZip01 —  talk 04:29, 12 April 2010 (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:Old Tajik Mandd.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 ⚡  14:31, 12 April 2010 (UTC)


 * File:Old Tajik Mandd.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * File is not at the listed source. Images on that source do not have a CC license. Eeekster (talk) 19:17, 9 April 2010 (UTC)


 * The original source of this file was www.geocty.uz but that site is now closed by the government of Uzbekistan. This picture was made by "Steve Evans from India and USA" in 2007. Hope it won't be deleted (Math920 (talk) 03:42, 11 April 2010 (UTC))
 * Keep I see no reason to hasten the deletion of this image. Just because we cannot verify it now (there are some pretty disturbing political problems in that area of the world right now), doesn't mean we cannot verify it later or that there was anything wrong with it in the first place. — BQZip01 —  talk 04:31, 12 April 2010 (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:Gold Dinar.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 ⚡  02:42, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * File:Gold Dinar.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * This file was uploaded by User:ZeroFiveZerome, claiming he created it himself. However, he claimed the same of a similar image (file), which was obviously taken from www.golddinar.ws. This file is, in any case, an image of one of that company's products, and the design should be non-free. Regardless who created the file, it appears to be a copyright violation. Alfons Åberg (talk) 21:27, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The other file that I mentioned has now been speedily deleted. Alfons Åberg (talk) 11:48, 10 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete clear copyvio and not user's own work. — BQZip01 —  talk 04:32, 12 April 2010 (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.