Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 August 24



File:Banner5.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 ⚡  01:14, 7 September 2010 (UTC)


 * File:Banner5.JPG ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * 2 images, no source for either- one on Left appears to be a screenshot from a Harry Potter movie (? - better eyes...) Skier Dude  ( talk  02:10, 24 August 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:Vinnie 02.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 ⚡  01:14, 7 September 2010 (UTC)


 * File:Vinnie 02.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Promotional photo of a notable individual. Likely copyrighted.  No reason given to suggest that uploader is copyright holder.  F ASTILYsock (T ALK ) 04:48, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete unless uploader offers proof he/she created this. Image looks like at DiMartina website. Ischium (talk) 18:57, 26 August 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:660amxsbest.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 ⚡  01:14, 7 September 2010 (UTC)


 * File:660amxsbest.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Class/group photo of some sort. Likely copyrighted.  No reason given to suggest that uploader is copyright holder.  F ASTILYsock (T ALK ) 04:49, 24 August 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:Black and bloom model.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 ⚡  01:14, 7 September 2010 (UTC)


 * File:Black and bloom model.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Studio style photo of a notable individual. Likely copyrighted.  No reason given to suggest that uploader is copyright holder.  F ASTILYsock (T ALK ) 04:49, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominee, also user also placed head scarf advertizing link in Chemotherapy, external links (now removed). Ischium (talk) 18:50, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment — User in question has been spamming the Alopecia areata, Headscarf and Baldness articles on 28 May 2010 with ads for her business. Ischium (talk) 19:13, 26 August 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:Mehul vora.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 ⚡  01:14, 7 September 2010 (UTC)


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


 * Studio style photo of a notable individual. Likely copyrighted.  No reason given to suggest that uploader is copyright holder.  F ASTILYsock (T ALK ) 04:49, 24 August 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:PoondiMatha.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 ⚡  01:14, 7 September 2010 (UTC)


 * File:PoondiMatha.JPG ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * While India has freedom of panorama, the USA does not, and files must be free in the US. can anyone say whether this image is PD-US by age? Magog the Ogre (talk) 10:26, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Plz help me stop deleting the file.I tried to add the same file in Wikimedia:Commons and waiting for the email to get the URL for that image.How long it will take to get that email? Arulraja (talk) 16:38, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I can't comment on the commons upload, seeing as I don't know what it is... but I can comment on the freedom of panorama issue. Can you tell me mroe about that artistic representation? When was it done? By whom? Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:00, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

I took that photograph on 20.05.2009...why is the problem that i cant upload the picture that photographed by me ?Arulraja (talk • contribs) 02:59, 4 September 2010 (UTC) Because the item you took a picture of is copyrighted. The people who made the artwork in your image own the copyright. I notice the image isn't being used in any files. Is that on purpose? Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:38, 5 September 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:Kazem HajirAzad in Game End 2010.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 ⚡  01:14, 7 September 2010 (UTC)


 * File:Kazem HajirAzad in Game End 2010.JPG ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Appears to be from a movie. Eeekster (talk) 12:31, 24 August 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:Khatami 2010.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 G5 by AnomieBOT ⚡  11:47, 25 August 2010 (UTC)


 * File:Khatami 2010.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * The tag states "own work" but the author is specified as a different user than the uploader. Nsk92 (talk) 14:01, 24 August 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:Rafsanjani.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 G5 by AnomieBOT ⚡  11:47, 25 August 2010 (UTC)


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


 * The creation date is specified as "1980s". If the image was created later than 1980, as appears likely, then it has been less than 30 years since its publication and hence the file is still not in PD. Nsk92 (talk) 14:16, 24 August 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:Parvaresh.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 G5 by AnomieBOT ⚡  11:47, 25 August 2010 (UTC)


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


 * The image creation date is specified as 1990 so it has been less than 30 years since the image's publication date and hence it is still not in PD. Nsk92 (talk) 14:54, 24 August 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:Portlandia.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 ⚡ 01:14, 7 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Addendum - file undeleted by Explicit and subsequently marked fair use. Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:09, 7 September 2010 (UTC)


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


 * As stated in Portlandia, the sculptor, Raymond Kaskey, closely guards his copyright of his statues. Therefore this image is non-free and it is too high-res to be fair use.  If someone wants to reduce it and write a fair use claim, feel free, but the original would still need to be deleted, and it would also need to be removed from the articles where the fair use claim is not valid. Wknight94 talk 17:11, 24 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep Yes, freedom of panorama doesn't apply to artwork in the United States. No, we do not delete images on the assumption that an artist objects to a photo of their artwork. Until we receive a takedown notice from the copyright holder about it, there is absolutely no reason to presume that permission to photograph the work was not obtained. Steven Walling  19:03, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * First, that seems a bit odd. But second, you don't have to assume - it's stated plainly in the article that he objects.  There is even a pretty clear reliable source for it.  Wanting to keep an unfree image of something that the copyright owner is known to object to, is very - well - un-Wikipedian.  I don't know how else to put it...  Wknight94 talk 20:04, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * There's a reliable source saying that he's touchy about copyright. There's not a takedown notice sent to OTRS. Assuming a copyright holder has an objection based on a news story is not a legitimate reason for deletion. Steven Walling  20:25, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Well by that logic, we should be able to plagiarize whatever we want. Copy whatever books you want and whatever pictures you want - just hope they don't catch you.  Shall I give Mr. Kaskey a phone call to help this along?  Wknight94 talk 21:39, 24 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - that might be how Google Books or YouTube does it, but that's not how things work here. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:56, 24 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - I cannot agree with Steven Walling. It is one of Wikipedia's pillars that this encyclopedia is free content. We even state flat out that images are available under a free license unless we state otherwise. In this case, however, we just don't know whether the image is free or not. The fact that we can't represent that this image is free content (or, at very least, fair use) means it does not pass muster. Worse, in this case we actually have a strong suspicion that the sculptor would object to the use of the image. It is simply inconsistent with our principles to keep this image. &mdash;Ipoellet (talk) 00:58, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, we do know that the image is unfree - I think even Walling agrees. His argument is apparently that he doesn't care (which is puzzling).  But I still see "The Free Encyclopedia" up in the top-left of my screen.  Wknight94 talk 13:15, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Uh, no. My argument is that it is free content, not that we ignore copyright. Steven Walling  17:57, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Your first statement was "Yes, freedom of panorama doesn't apply to artwork in the United States". An odd thing to say if you think the content is free in the first place.  Following that up with talk of requiring takedown notices is unlike anything I've ever heard here.  Wknight94 talk 18:21, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Just to clarify, when I said we "don't know" whether the image is free or not, I was basing that on the theoretical (albeit highly unlikely) possibility that the sculptor would release/had released the image, but that we didn't know about it. But the upshot of my reasoning is in line with Wknight94's position: we must act as though this image is unfree. Which it almost certainly is. &mdash;Ipoellet (talk) 03:26, 26 August 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:Portrait of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.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 G5 by AnomieBOT ⚡  11:47, 25 August 2010 (UTC)


 * File:Portrait of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * This image is sourced to http://karafarini-markazi.ir/ (site in Farsi unsurprisingly). Since I don't read Farsi I am relying on Google, which could be wrong, but Google translate renders the copyright statement at the bottom of the page as something like all rights reserved, no reproduction without permission. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:14, 24 August 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:Sanjabi.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 G5 by AnomieBOT ⚡  11:47, 25 August 2010 (UTC)


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


 * Uploader claims image creation date was 1979 but no evidence offered. Subject died 1995 so it could clearly be later. No reason to credit claims given uploader's record. May be speedily deleteable under WP:CSD in any case. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:27, 24 August 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:Doncaster Shoppingtown 1970's.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 ⚡  08:16, 7 September 2010 (UTC)


 * File:Doncaster Shoppingtown 1970's.JPG ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Source is "found in an issue of the Reader's Digest 1974". Doubt this can be free. Perhaps it could be fair use with the right arguments. MGA73 (talk) 20:48, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: User aware of possible problem and seeks licencing advice before any deletion. Ischium (talk) 18:59, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose deletion - This was a very small image in an archaic Australian issue of Reader's Digest from 1974, it is of great historic value to the article on Doncaster Shoppingtown as it illustrates the original internal fitout of the centre. There is no credit on the image in the publication and it can safely be assumed that it was a promotional image released by the original owners of the centre. It would not damage the reputation of the centre and would in contrast serve the subject matter of the article more positively and accurately. Nick carson (talk) 01:48, 5 September 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:St. Pius X school crest.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 ⚡  08:16, 7 September 2010 (UTC)


 * File:St. Pius X school crest.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * School crest/logo most likely belongs to the school. Eeekster (talk) 23:45, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep — I took this photograph of the school crest in a public place on a pillar at the school gate. I have uploaded the entire picture showing the context (image will expire 2010-09-07) to prove that the picture is my own work and that I cropped the school crest element out of my own photograph for use in the school infobox. Such school crests are commonly shown in   and in    as a matter of course: the infoboxes have preprogrammed slots to display the crests. Please let me know if there are any other concerns.  --O&#39;Dea (talk) 00:02, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment — Wikipedia policy COM:FOP#Ireland cites Irish copyright law that "permits photographers to take pictures of sculptures, buildings, and works of artistic craftsmanship that are permanently located in a public place or premises open to the public, and to publish such pictures in any way." This law applies in this case: I took a picture of school gates with the school crest openly displayed in public thereon. --O&#39;Dea (talk) 13:25, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep as uploader argues work in public place and allowed by cited Irish law. Ischium (talk) 19:00, 26 August 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.