Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2013 June 30



File:Catawissa Bottling Moxie Bottle.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 ⚡  20:12, 8 July 2013 (UTC)


 * File:Catawissa Bottling Moxie Bottle.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).

What about Commons:Template:Useful-object-US, ? If it was on en, and used, for this, would you see that as OK? --Elvey (talk) 06:44, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Packaging artwork, so not entirely uploader's own work Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:21, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * delete derivative of copyrighted artwork. Mangoe (talk) 14:58, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per Commons:COM:PACKAGING. --Stefan2 (talk) 09:01, 6 July 2013 (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:NATIONAL LIBRARY OF BELARUS - MINSK.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: Kept. Diannaa (talk) 20:46, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
 * File:NATIONAL LIBRARY OF BELARUS - MINSK.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * This image is nominally a CC-BY-SA Photograph, the building however isn't, meaning that the image is non-free. Was tagged as photo-of art but others objected. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:58, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep per FoP-USonly. US law allows you to take photos of any building, regardless of where the building is located. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:01, 30 June 2013 (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 ⚡ 10:07, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * This was originally uploaded on Commons by an editor there who is retired, has traveled the world, and is slowly uploading his huge collection of photos (many in the US are listed on the National Register of Historic Places). I transferred this file here at his request and used a Fair Use rationale as I assumed the same issues that lead to it being deleted on Commons would require it to be Fair Use here. I was going to resize the file (make it smaller) for Fair Use, when the license was changed. I think it is a useful photo either way and await the outcome of this action. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 12:35, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia and Commons define "free" and "unfree" differently. Commons requires that the image is free to use in both the USA and Belarus, whereas Wikipedia only requires that it is free to use in the United States. This image is free to use in the United States, but it isn't free to use in Belarus. It therefore satisfies Wikipedia's definition of "free" although it doesn't satisfy Commons's definition of free. --Stefan2 (talk) 09:00, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Belarus does not have freedom of panorama (though I doubt this legal concept has much meaning for them) so any photo of this library for the next 100 years or so will be, by our standards a derivative of a copyrighted object, so this is NOT replaceable by a copyright free photo. It is properly used as a non-free fair use here.  Smallbones( smalltalk ) 15:46, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep; not a copyright problem according to the rules that we follow here. No problems with this image either regarding the subject (due to US law) or the image itself (due to a clear free license by the photographer).  Nyttend (talk) 18:39, 30 June 2013 (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:9.28.06Bergenline19ST.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 ⚡  20:12, 8 July 2013 (UTC)


 * File:9.28.06Bergenline19ST.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Derivative work of banner Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:25, 30 June 2013 (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:9.5.07AMCGardenStatePlaza.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: Kept. Diannaa (talk) 20:52, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
 * File:9.5.07AMCGardenStatePlaza.JPG ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Derivative work of the mural. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:26, 30 June 2013 (UTC)


 * The photo is of the theater lobby, of which the mural is only a part of it. Nightscream (talk) 22:09, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I would say that it focuses on the building and that the mural is secondary (i.e. de minimis). Also, there was a case (Leicester v. Warner Brothers) where it was decided that an artwork is covered by the building's FOP if it is inseparable from the building. The image is probably OK. Interestingly, it says that the image was moved to Commons:File:9.5.07AMCGardenStatePlaza.JPG and since deleted. The Commons file name must be wrong as there is no indication that there ever was any file under that name, but it would be nice to see how people argued on Commons. --Stefan2 (talk) 09:10, 6 July 2013 (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:Tour traje.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 ⚡  20:12, 8 July 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Per - Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tour traje.jpg Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:41, 30 June 2013 (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:Diet vanilla coke original 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 as F9 by AnomieBOT ⚡  22:13, 11 July 2013 (UTC)


 * File:Diet vanilla coke original logo.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Derivative of packaging artwork Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:43, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep this was previously nominated by Sfan00IMG to PUF in September 2009 and kept. If Sfan00IMG is so intent on getting it deleted, he should use FFD, as it already has survived PUF. -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 07:54, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: Without a valid WP:FUR (which requires, among other things, that it be USED in an article.) it may get deleted soon. If you care you better add one stat. But-- maybe Commons:Template:Useful-object-US is valid; Sfan? --Elvey (talk) 11:44 pm, Today (UTC−7).--Elvey (talk) 06:42, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: the 2009 keep was not based on needing a FUR. Since it survived PUF, it needs to go to FFD, as it was determined to not be unfree in 2009. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 00:50, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete The packaging appears to be ineligible for copyright. However, the problem is that the uploader doesn't seem to be the photographer as the same photo appeared at http://forums.tannerworld.com/showthread.php?t=6000 four year before it was uploaded to Wikipedia. The image therefore violates the photographer's copyright. --Stefan2 (talk) 09:12, 6 July 2013 (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:Jcockx 001.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 ⚡  22:13, 11 July 2013 (UTC)


 * File:Jcockx 001.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Painter died in 1976, still copyrighted) -Per Commons Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:20, 30 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Owner of image and original art has given permission for its use on Wiki. ArtFan
 * Please provide evidence of this - see WP:COPYREQ Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:43, 30 June 2013 (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:Jcockx 002.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 ⚡  22:13, 11 July 2013 (UTC)


 * File:Jcockx 002.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Painter died in 1976, still copyrighted, per Commons Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:20, 30 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Owner of image and original art has given permission for its use on Wiki. ArtFan
 * Please provide evidence of this - see WP:COPYREQ Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:44, 30 June 2013 (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:Lizcloseupcolor.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 ⚡  20:12, 8 July 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Copyright is held by the wiseman group . No indication of the image being under CC-BY-SA or GFDL. IRWolfie- (talk) 15:54, 30 June 2013 (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:Paula Seling- 2009.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 F7 by AnomieBOT ⚡  20:11, 2 July 2013 (UTC)


 * File:Paula Seling- 2009.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).

being presented to support this. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:38, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * This is getting silly, This is clearly a replaceable fair use image, but the uploader seems to think it's Creative Commons with no evidence
 * Your tag is definitely applicable, and an inappropriate removal doesn't distract from that; we could presumably even warn the uploader (uw-speedy1 etc.), but I don't feel like bothering. Bug me on my talk page after the server time reaches 2 July, and I'll delete it, since it will have been two days since it was tagged, with no solid evidence of non-replaceability having been provided.  Nyttend (talk) 17:38, 1 July 2013 (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 ⚡ 18:39, 1 July 2013 (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.