Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2011 January 13



File:Photograph of Jared Lee Loughner by Pima County Sheriff's Office.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: File is listed for deletion, at and is subject of an RFC on the article talk page... I think this can be closed --Errant (chat!) 15:42, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

The justification that the living individual is currently in custody and therefore we cannot get a free use image now appears to fail WP:FAIR for living people. Active Banana    (bananaphone  21:07, 13 January 2011 (UTC)  Every credible news outlet is using this image and until a person objects to the "supposed" copyright status I deem it is in the free domain as it was taken by law enforcement as a standard prisoner intake photograph. Jasonanaggie (talk) 09:53, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The above user has tried various end-arounds to subvert consensus, and this is one of them. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:28, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * This should be speedly closed, there is already another active discussion going on here on the image: Files for deletion/2011 January 13 - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:51, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * There is no doubt that this image is not free. The question is whether it meets the non-free content criteria. -Atmoz (talk) 22:52, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * It was "released to the public". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:05, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * FYI: Another concurrent discussion was opened earlier at Media copyright questions. KimChee (talk) 00:10, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I think it is acceptable to use this because we have nothing else and we need an image for this person.75.73.193.118 (talk) 00:38, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy close. It is fine, as it was released to the public.--Epeefleche (talk) 05:18, 19 January 2011 (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 ⚡ 09:30, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * File is now listed at WP:Non-free content review, this discussion should be closed. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:23, 23 January 2011 (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:Bank of Hills and MBM logo.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 ⚡  01:55, 27 January 2011 (UTC)


 * File:Bank of Hills and MBM logo.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * I doubt these corporate logos belong to the uploader. J Milburn (talk) 01:08, 13 January 2011 (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:Ps store remoteplay.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 ⚡  01:55, 27 January 2011 (UTC)


 * File:Ps store remoteplay.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * On-screen image central to the photo is not free. RJaguar3 &#124; u &#124; t 05:12, 13 January 2011 (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:Josef Zwonarz.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 ⚡  14:07, 27 January 2011 (UTC)




 * After going through the editor's uploads and judging from their upload history, I have reason to believe that the uploader doesn't seem to understand how copyright works. I doubt any of these photos were actually taken by the uploader and could possibly be copyright violations. — ξ xplicit  05:50, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The Zwornarz file is clearly a scan from a book, so I deleted that. Tineye didn't find the others and I don't quite know what to make of them. The uploader hasn't edited since '08, so I don't think we'll ever have answers on the rest. --Danger (talk) 12:59, 27 January 2011 (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:Dalecreekpic.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: keep. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:01, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


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


 * Changed CSD to PUF. There is no license but photo is from 1868 so there i a good chance this is PD if we can find the right license. MGA73 (talk) 14:31, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * PD-1923. Harper's Weekly is a US publication, so the conclusion is obvious. -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 07:58, 21 January 2011 (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:George Reynolds (Mormon).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 by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:55, 27 January 2011 (UTC)


 * File:George Reynolds (Mormon).png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * The previous uploaded image was Georgereynolds.gif. (see: "Previous description history”) Prior to conversion to .png this image was tagged as Fair use with PromoPhoto, but on 11 August 2007 it was changed to PD-1923.  However there is no publication information given.  I have looked for this image and have only found one publication using this image and that was The LDS "The History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Chapter 33, published copyrighted in 1989. It is quite possible that it is PD-1923 or pd-old, but there is no evidence of ether of these as no Author or publication information is given.  I located a PD image of George Reynolds and uploaded it here so this image is no longer used. --ARTEST4ECHO (talk/contribs) 15:10, 13 January 2011 (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:Thermal Circuits2.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: delete. The tipoff that the image is likely a copyvio is the "Figure 1" notation, coupled with the rotten quality of the first uploaded image, which indicates that it was likely lifted out of a book, and that the alleged "author" isn't really the author. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:08, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * File:Thermal Circuits2.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Appears to be a scan rather than a user-created image. Kelly  hi! 15:43, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. The JPEG artifacts are characteristic of a straight conversion from lossless. Also, the first version is better, don't know why the uploader downsized it ... -- 08:03, 21 January 2011 (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.

File:IPod touch revised.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 G7 by AnomieBOT ⚡  09:30, 21 January 2011 (UTC)


 * File:IPod touch revised.JPG ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Not sure the icons on the screen is free. Photo itself is PD-self but since the icons is a derivative work they should also be free if we shall keep it. MGA73 (talk) 20:50, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as with the many other images of the iPhone OS. Not free for us to use.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  23:33, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete I'm the original file uploader, and because the device is obsolete, delete the photo, as it does not reflect the current iPod touch. Bentoman (talk) 21:00, 14 January 2011 (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:DSC00321.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 ⚡  02:15, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * File:DSC00321.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Invalid PD claim. It's a 2D work of art of which we don't know whether or not its a government photo (which may fall under PD in Canada). –MuZemike 23:17, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Question Just what evidence do you have that this isn't free? DanTD (talk) 18:49, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how Canadian law is different, but under US law, a paragraph of creative text is more than enough to have a copyright attached. Therefore, we would need a tag for the author of the text pictured in the sign.  RJaguar3 &#124; u &#124; t 05:08, 24 January 2011 (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:Unterschrift Leontiev.JPG
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 2em 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 by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:55, 27 January 2011 (UTC)


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


 * Unused file, possibly an uncredited derivative of an SVG, no indication of where the source of the trace came from, and therefore, no idea if it is an accurate depiction.  S ven M anguard   <font color="FCD116">Wha?  23:32, 13 January 2011 (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.