Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2011 September 17



File:Stephen Neal.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 ⚡  02:06, 1 October 2011 (UTC)


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


 * The statue depicted in this photograph was created in the United States in 1907, so I believe it must be in the public domain. (Note that the tag, which claims the artist died over 70 years ago, is false here; according to the Stephen Neal (bust) article, the sculptor, Clara Barth Leonard Sorenson Dieman, died in 1959.) However, the act of photographing the sculpture creates a new copyright, and the uploader has not indicated the licensing status of this photograph. If the photograph itself has not been released freely, we cannot accept it here, since it would be replaceable by a freely licensed photograph of this public-domain sculpture; see WP:NFCC. See also the following listing. —Bkell (talk) 01:01, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * the source of the photograph, http://www.flickr.com/photos/21547860@N06/5239824052/in/photostream/ says "all rights reserved" Thincat (talk) 11:15, 29 September 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:Statehouse 153.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; file is tagged as non-free.- F ASTILY  (TALK) 00:08, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * File:Statehouse 153.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * I know this image is already tagged as a non-free image. But the statue depicted in this photograph was created in the United States in 1907, so I believe it must be in the public domain. However, the act of photographing the sculpture creates a new copyright, and the uploader has not indicated the licensing status of this photograph. If the photograph itself has not been released freely, we cannot accept it here, since it would be replaceable by a freely licensed photograph of this public-domain sculpture; see WP:NFCC. See also the previous listing. —Bkell (talk) 01:01, 17 September 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. AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:09, 17 September 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:RetrospectEnsembleLogo.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: Keep; file is tagged as non-free.- F ASTILY  (TALK) 00:09, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * File:RetrospectEnsembleLogo.png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Confused copyright tags here. This image is tagged with, which indicates that the copyright holder has released all rights, but it also has a non-free use rationale and a tag. —Bkell (talk) 01:25, 17 September 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. AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:09, 17 September 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:Thomasgraeme.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 F8 by A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:13, 17 September 2011 (UTC)


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


 * Source and copyright confusion. This image is tagged with, but it also has a fair-use rationale. Of course, there is no need for a rationale if the image is in the public domain. The rationale says that this is a "promotional photo" of Thomas Graeme, but it's not, it's a painting. Thomas Graeme apparently lived in the mid-18th century, according to the Graeme Park article. The rationale also says that this image is "used on the biography page about him by USHistory.org of Graeme Park." I cannot quite figure out what this means, but I am guessing that it means the uploader took this image from a page hosted on USHistory.org. A painting of a man who lived in the mid-18th century is likely to be the public domain, as claimed, but we have no good source information for this painting to verify that. —Bkell (talk) 03:22, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The official Graeme Park Flickr page has a photo of this painting here and says it is attributed to Robert Feke, who died in 1750. Since it is PD-art, it is free (the upload was done a long time ago when the uploader was not very experienced in permissions). Since it is a free image, I moved the file to Commons (same name) and deleted it here. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 14:09, 17 September 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:SF Chinatown Library.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 ⚡  02:06, 1 October 2011 (UTC)


 * File:SF Chinatown Library.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * The description says this image comes from "yellingatalins @ FlickR.com", but does not provide a URL. Flickr seems not to have a user named "yellingatalins", at least not currently, but this image does appear in the photostream of the user "foodjungle": . That photo is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0); the "non-commercial" part of that license is not free enough for Wikipedia. I cannot find an upload date for that Flickr photo, so I cannot confirm that it was indeed uploaded there to Flickr before this Wikipedia image, but it seems that we have no evidence that the copyright holder has released this photo under an acceptable free license. —Bkell (talk) 05:25, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I should note that this uploader has uploaded many similar images from Flickr and tagged them all with the tag, apparently ignoring the licensing information on the Flickr source page. I've deleted the ones that were the most obvious copyright violations (i.e., the images for which I could find the original Flickr source page, and which were tagged on Flickr with "All Rights Reserved" or "non-commercial" or "no derivatives"). This image is a little trickier, because I can't verify that I've actually found the original Flickr source. —Bkell (talk) 19:01, 19 September 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:Future cubist painting.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 ⚡  02:06, 1 October 2011 (UTC)


 * File:Future cubist painting.JPG ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Uploader does not claim copyright on statue, copyright holder on statue unknown. ▫  Johnny Mr Nin ja  06:04, 17 September 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:Skyline image.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 F9 by AnomieBOT ⚡  08:09, 17 September 2011 (UTC)


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


 * Compliation of almost definitley non-free images. Acather96 (talk) 06:59, 17 September 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:Anishinaabe Historical Marker.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 ⚡  02:06, 1 October 2011 (UTC)


 * File:Anishinaabe Historical Marker.png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Photograph of an information sign, contains text that is possibly copyrighted. Acather96 (talk) 09:18, 17 September 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:Tinchy_Stryder_pointing.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 ⚡  02:06, 1 October 2011 (UTC)


 * File:Tinchy Stryder pointing.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).

My Response Hi there feydey,
 * Is available at http://www.toneyandco.com/gallery feydey (talk) 11:56, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

The photo (File:Tinchy Stryder pointing.jpg) was taken at the University of London on May 6, 2009 by my iPhone while Tinchy Stryder was still a student at UEL. We were colleagues at the University, the photo was uploaded to Ruff Sqwad's MySpace by me in May 2009 along with a few other photos, here is the link for you > http://www.myspace.com/ruffsqwad/photos/13558104#%7B%22ImageId%22%3A13558104%7D and the people next to him to the right of the photo which I cropped out of the photo is is David Danning also known as Dirty Danger and DJ Scholar who are part of Tinchy Stryder's rap group Ruff Sqwad. The photo was uploaded to Ruff Sqwad's Myspace page in May 2009 shortly after it was taken by me Mark Myrie. I have seen the website of this "tonyandco" for the first time and all I can say is that this "tonyandco" have blatantly went on to Ruff Sqwad's MySpace website and took the photo from there and putted on their website without permission of the native copyright holder which is me and placed it on their website due to the excitement of Tinchy Stryder and Ruff Sqwad members wearing their T-shirts. The lack of quality of this website "www.toneyandco.com" and professionalism of this T-shirt company shows you that they obviously do not care in the world about copyrights and most probably don't know anything about copyrights of other peoples photo's. So all I can say know to you feydey is that you please take my word for it and understand what I'm saying that I'am truly the phototaker of this photo and that someone from this "www.toneyandco.com" had spotted the photo upon visiting the MySpace account of Ruff Sqwad and uploaded it to their website as a promotional and out of ecitement, thinking that nobody can stop them from using the photo on their website. Thank's for your understanding feydey. MarkMysoe (talk) 14:16, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * - I was also wondering about this picture http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dionne_Bromfield_Photo.jpg - did you take that yourself? None of your picture uploads have meta data attached, do you have any of the originals that you took yourself? Off2riorob (talk) 11:58, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Any of this may be wrong and if so I'd be glad of correction. The photo you uploaded to Wikipedia is automatically licensed for commercial use so Toney were entitled to use it provided they attributed it to Wikipedia. By looking on WP people can then see it is your photo. However, Toney are in breach of licence without attribution and any different claim they make is void. The information you give about MySpace adds credibility to your claim that Toney copied the photo from you and not the other way round! However, MySpace does not provide licensing information. A different issue is that if Toney made the T-shirt to a design they produced or purchased rights to, it is unlikely they have licensed it to allow people to publish photos of it. If, however, the T-shirt design is incidental to your photo then your photo is all right. I think it is incidental but others might disagree. In the uncropped photo on MySpace it is more obviously incidental. But if the design(s) belongs to RuffSqwad or whoever, then it is the actual copyright owner that matters. Generally, on Wikipedia, when someone uploads a photo and they say they took it themselves then they are believed unless there is evidence that the claim may not be true. I can fully understand feydey questioning it and Off2riorob's suggestion to provide more definite information is helpful and this might turn out to be necessary. Thincat (talk) 15:56, 29 September 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:Fantasy Fountain.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 ⚡  02:06, 18 September 2011 (UTC)


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


 * Photograph of a (presumably) copyrighted statue. There is no freedom of panorama for statues in the United States. J Milburn (talk) 15:33, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Marked for speedy deletion by author. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:40, 17 September 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.