Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2013 May 20



File:Lombardi GABP.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 ⚡  19:11, 30 May 2013 (UTC)


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


 * No freedom of panorama in the US for statues. (ESkog)(Talk) 13:43, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unless http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Canoe1967/Sculptors succeeds for the sculptor.--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:01, 20 May 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:Amanda Todd - 01.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 as fair use for one article. Diannaa (talk) 04:39, 25 July 2013 (UTC) Note also that this is an incorrect venue for review of a file already labelled as non-free. Diannaa (talk) 16:42, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * File:Amanda Todd - 01.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * I do not feel that this file passes muster as a non free file. The article is about an event and is not a biography. While this is a very pleasant picture of the young lady it does not add to our understanding of her death. It serves, really, as a memorial, or as a curiosity. "So that is what the girl who killed herself looked like." But there is no rationale here for either having this picture in Wikipedia. Others own the copyright. The fact that she is dead and there is no obvious replacement is an excuse, not a reason to have it here. It does not pass at least WP:NFCC and t must pass every last one of those criteria to be valid here Fiddle   Faddle  15:17, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: Please review the following:
 * Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content/Archive_55
 * Deletion review/Log/2011 December 5
 * This applies for all of the "image deletion" discussions here and below.
 * WhisperToMe (talk) 15:36, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The article is not about the person. It is abut the suicide of the person, an event. There is a substantial distinction between the two. If the article were a biographical article I would have a different view. Wikipedia policies for non free files are very clear. All of the criterai must be passed, not one of them and not some of them. We can not exhibit this file in this context, and, since it is not free, we may thus not exhibit it at all. Fiddle   Faddle  15:41, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Keep. I think we are forgetting one of the fundamental principles of the project. This is a lasting project not like a facebook memorial. If we delete these images now, they will not be public domain for up to 120 years after the date of creation. All the memorials to them will probably be long gone and forgotten. If none of the other memorials survive then we should be the only source of these images 120 years from now. I doubt that anyone else would keep them stored that long. It is a shame that records have been destroyed for millennia that we would find very useful today. If consensus decides to keep deleting history then how will Wikipedians look in the eyes of historians millennia from now. See also:Ernie_Kovacs--Canoe1967 (talk) 19:19, 20 May 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 ⚡ 16:08, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The specific scenario on using those pictures in articles about those people's deaths has been discussed already. You are welcome to re-open the debate and debate it again, but it's good to read the previous discussions so you know what points have been covered. The Deletion review/Log/2011 December 5 deletion review was about this particular scenario. The relevant XFD was Files_for_deletion/2011_November_21. Because of the DRV of 2011 December 5, it became a keep. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:30, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The deletion review you link here was overturned because the closing admin inadvertently closed a discussion for an image he had originally nominated for deletion. I don't see anyone making a determination out of that discussion which is relevant to this debate. (ESkog)(Talk) 19:37, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * It could be seen that the previous debate "should have been closed as a keep" and was only closed as a delete because of that admin's actions. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:48, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: There was an older debate at Files_for_deletion/2011_July_17 WhisperToMe (talk) 17:39, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: Tim Trent stated on his talk page User_talk:Timtrent that he does not wish to consider previous deletion debates. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:48, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. If an editor wants to ignore previous consensus and keep dragging these images to deletion dicussions then closing admins may decide to ignore all these discussions and just close them as kept as per consensus. There is probably a policy about dragging these images through the mud every two weeks after consensus but I couldn't be bothered looking for it. Someone else may wish to though. If some editors keep bringing up legal issues as their only point then they should contact WMF legal and have them make the decision. Not us nor admins.--Canoe1967 (talk) 20:54, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * It is always better to misquote than not to quote at all. Fiddle   Faddle  22:29, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * To avoid misquoting it is good to show a diff (maybe I should have done it off the bat, but I'll just do it now). This diff says "The issue is not what we wish would be the case. The issue is what. legally, the case truly is. One of the greatest challenges with Wikipedia is that people consider that the alleged wisdom of crowds trumps the law, that Wikipedia is somehow above the law, because they opine that something they wish to happen should happen. Prior discussions, whatever they may contain, truly are immaterial.[...]" (there is more after this quote) and then one can see the full context. When I told him that the best practice is to show understanding of previous discussions, he stated disagreement. WhisperToMe (talk) 22:34, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment This is on the wrong discussion page. This page is for files which are claimed to be free but don't seem to be free. If it is disputed whether the image satisfies the WP:NFCC policy, the usual place to discuss the matter is WP:FFD or WP:NFCR. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:51, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Correct. Should we just close them and hat them all here then?--Canoe1967 (talk) 22:16, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes probably, with a note to the original poster that we appreciate his concern and he has a reasonable point but probably needs to run another WP:RFC to overturn the previous one regarding pictures of dead people. Alternatively, they (or just this first one) could be moved to WP:FFD or WP:NFCR... but deleting these files would require a change in policy I think unless the argument is accepted there that an article titled Suicide of Amanda Todd is not really "about that person" (Amanda Todd) in the same way that one titled Amanda Todd would be. A dubious argument, and its pretty clear that the previous RfC included articles such as "Death of X" as equal to "X". But consensus can change, so maybe its worth moving over there. Herostratus (talk) 02:01, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Someone should go through and remove all the tags and close these discussions then. I still feel that WMF legal should be contacted before another RfC as it is their servers and their ultimate decision on what they wish to host. They may wish a link to my first comment in this section as well to help them decide.--Canoe1967 (talk) 03:35, 21 May 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:M Meier.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 as fair use for one article. Diannaa (talk) 04:39, 25 July 2013 (UTC) Note also that this is an incorrect venue for review of a file already labelled as non-free. Diannaa (talk) 16:42, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * File:M Meier.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * I do not feel that this file passes muster as a non free file. The article is about an event and is not a biography. While this is a very pleasant picture of the young lady it does not add to our understanding of her death. It serves, really, as a memorial, or as a curiosity. "So that is what the girl who killed herself looked like." But there is no rationale here for either having this picture in Wikipedia. Others own the copyright. The fact that she is dead and there is no obvious replacement is an excuse, not a reason to have it here. It does not pass at least WP:NFCC and it must pass every last one of those criteria to be valid here Fiddle   Faddle  15:19, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: Please review the following:
 * Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content/Archive_55
 * Deletion review/Log/2011 December 5
 * WhisperToMe (talk) 15:36, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The article is not about the person. It is abut the suicide of the person, an event. There is a substantial distinction between the two. If the article were a biographical article I would have a different view. Wikipedia policies for non free files are very clear. All of the criterai must be passed, not one of them and not some of them. We can not exhibit this file in this context, and, since it is not free, we may thus not exhibit it at all. Fiddle   Faddle  15:43, 20 May 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 ⚡ 16:08, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The specific scenario on using those pictures in articles about those people's deaths has been discussed already. You are welcome to re-open the debate and debate it again, but it's good to read the previous discussions so you know what points have been covered. The Deletion review/Log/2011 December 5 deletion review was about this particular scenario. The relevant XFD was Files_for_deletion/2011_November_21. Because of the DRV of 2011 December 5, it became a keep. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:30, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The deletion review you link here was overturned because the closing admin inadvertently closed a discussion for an image he had originally nominated for deletion. I don't see anyone making a determination out of that discussion which is relevant to this debate. (ESkog)(Talk) 19:37, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * From the thread, the XFD it refers to should have been closed as a keep and it wasn't because of the admin's actions. We need the DRV to explain the real result of the XFD. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:49, 20 May 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:Tyler Clementi.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 as fair use for one article. Diannaa (talk) 04:38, 25 July 2013 (UTC) Note also that this is an incorrect venue for review of a file already labelled as non-free. Diannaa (talk) 16:42, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * File:Tyler Clementi.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * I do not feel that this file passes muster as a non free file. The article is about an event and is not a biography. While this is a very pleasant picture of the young man it does not add to our understanding of his death. It serves, really, as a memorial, or as a curiosity. "So that is what the young man who killed himself looked like." But there is no rationale here for either having this picture in Wikipedia. Others own the copyright. The fact that he is dead and there is no obvious replacement is an excuse, not a reason to have it here. It does not pass at least WP:NFCC and it must pass every last one of those criteria to be valid here Fiddle   Faddle  15:20, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: Please review the following:
 * Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content/Archive_55
 * Deletion review/Log/2011 December 5
 * WhisperToMe (talk) 15:36, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The article is not about the person. It is abut the suicide of the person, an event. There is a substantial distinction between the two. If the article were a biographical article I would have a different view. Wikipedia policies for non free files are very clear. All of the criterai must be passed, not one of them and not some of them. We can not exhibit this file in this context, and, since it is not free, we may thus not exhibit it at all. Fiddle   Faddle  15:43, 20 May 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 ⚡ 16:08, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The specific scenario on using those pictures in articles about those people's deaths has been discussed already. You are welcome to re-open the debate and debate it again, but it's good to read the previous discussions so you know what points have been covered. The Deletion review/Log/2011 December 5 deletion review was about this particular scenario. The relevant XFD was Files_for_deletion/2011_November_21. Because of the DRV of 2011 December 5, it became a keep. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:30, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The deletion review you link here was overturned because the closing admin inadvertently closed a discussion for an image he had originally nominated for deletion. I don't see anyone making a determination out of that discussion which is relevant to this debate. (ESkog)(Talk) 19:37, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * From the thread, the XFD it refers to should have been closed as a keep and it wasn't because of the admin's actions. We need the DRV to explain the real result of the XFD. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:50, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep The article this image is used in is about the suicide of a person. This image provides context in terms of whose suicide is being discussed thus fulfilling WP:NFCC, IMO.  All other criteria for WP:NFCC are also fulfilled, IMO.  --TreyGeek (talk) 03:05, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep per TreyGeek. —Tom Morris (talk) 14:03, 23 May 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:Phoebeprince.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 as fair use for one article. Diannaa (talk) 04:38, 25 July 2013 (UTC) Note also that this is an incorrect venue for review of a file already labelled as non-free. Diannaa (talk) 16:42, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * File:Phoebeprince.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * I do not feel that this file passes muster as a non free file. The article is about an event and is not a biography. While this is a very pleasant picture of the young lady it does not add to our understanding of her death. It serves, really, as a memorial, or as a curiosity. "So that is what the girl who killed herself looked like." But there is no rationale here for either having this picture in Wikipedia. Others own the copyright. The fact that she is dead and there is no obvious replacement is an excuse, not a reason to have it here. It does not pass at least WP:NFCC and it must pass every last one of those criteria to be valid here Fiddle   Faddle  15:21, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete it, don't care. - Who is John Galt? ✉ 16:06, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Are you the original uploader? An image is not owned by the person who uploads it, so while the uploader has a say, he/she does not have the final decision. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:31, 20 May 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 ⚡ 16:08, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The specific scenario on using those pictures in articles about those people's deaths has been discussed already. You are welcome to re-open the debate and debate it again, but it's good to read the previous discussions so you know what points have been covered. The Deletion review/Log/2011 December 5 deletion review was about this particular scenario. The relevant XFD was Files_for_deletion/2011_November_21. Because of the DRV of 2011 December 5, it became a keep. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:31, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The deletion review you link here was overturned because the closing admin inadvertently closed a discussion for an image he had originally nominated for deletion. I don't see anyone making a determination out of that discussion which is relevant to this debate. (ESkog)(Talk) 19:37, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * From the thread, the XFD it refers to should have been closed as a keep and it wasn't because of the admin's actions. We need the DRV to explain the real result of the XFD. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:50, 20 May 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:Jamey Rodemeyer.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: Kept as fair use for one article. Diannaa (talk) 04:37, 25 July 2013 (UTC) Note also that this is an incorrect venue for review of a file already labelled as non-free. Diannaa (talk) 16:42, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * File:Jamey Rodemeyer.png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * I do not feel that this file passes muster as a non free file. The article is about an event and is not a biography. While this is a very pleasant picture of the young man it does not add to our understanding of his death. It serves, really, as a memorial, or as a curiosity. "So that is what the boy who killed himself looked like." But there is no rationale here for either having this picture in Wikipedia. Others own the copyright. The fact that he is dead and there is no obvious replacement is an excuse, not a reason to have it here. It does not pass at least WP:NFCC and it must pass every last one of those criteria to be valid here Fiddle   Faddle  15:23, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: Please review the following:
 * Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content/Archive_55
 * Deletion review/Log/2011 December 5
 * WhisperToMe (talk) 15:36, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The article is not about the person. It is abut the suicide of the person, an event. There is a substantial distinction between the two. If the article were a biographical article I would have a different view. Wikipedia policies for non free files are very clear. All of the criterai must be passed, not one of them and not some of them. We can not exhibit this file in this context, and, since it is not free, we may thus not exhibit it at all. Fiddle   Faddle  15:43, 20 May 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 ⚡ 16:08, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The specific scenario on using those pictures in articles about those people's deaths has been discussed already. You are welcome to re-open the debate and debate it again, but it's good to read the previous discussions so you know what points have been covered. The Deletion review/Log/2011 December 5 deletion review was about this particular scenario. The relevant XFD was Files_for_deletion/2011_November_21. Because of the DRV of 2011 December 5, it became a keep. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:31, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The deletion review you link here was overturned because the closing admin inadvertently closed a discussion for an image he had originally nominated for deletion. I don't see anyone making a determination out of that discussion which is relevant to this debate. (ESkog)(Talk) 19:37, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * From the thread, the XFD it refers to should have been closed as a keep and it wasn't because of the admin's actions. We need the DRV to explain the real result of the XFD. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:50, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep The article this image is used in is about the suicide of a person. This image provides context in terms of whose suicide is being discussed thus fulfilling WP:NFCC, IMO.  All other criteria for WP:NFCC are also fulfilled, IMO.  --TreyGeek (talk) 03:04, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Per TreyGeek. —Tom Morris (talk) 14:04, 23 May 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:RyanHalligan.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 as fair use for one article. Diannaa (talk) 04:37, 25 July 2013 (UTC) Note also that this is an incorrect venue for review of a file already labelled as non-free. Diannaa (talk) 16:42, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * File:RyanHalligan.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * I do not feel that this file passes muster as a non free file. The article is about an event and is not a biography. While this is a very pleasant picture of the young boy it does not add to our understanding of his death. It serves, really, as a memorial, or as a curiosity. "So that is what the boy who killed himself looked like." But there is no rationale here for either having this picture in Wikipedia. Others own the copyright. The fact that he is dead and there is no obvious replacement is an excuse, not a reason to have it here. It does not pass at least WP:NFCC and t must pass every last one of those criteria to be valid here Fiddle   Faddle  15:26, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: This issue has been discussed before. Please review the following:
 * Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content/Archive_55
 * Deletion review/Log/2011 December 5
 * WhisperToMe (talk) 15:34, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The article is not about the person. It is abut the suicide of the person, an event. There is a substantial distinction between the two. If the article were a biographical article I would have a different view. Wikipedia policies for non free files are very clear. All of the criterai must be passed, not one of them and not some of them. We can not exhibit this file in this context, and, since it is not free, we may thus not exhibit it at all. Fiddle   Faddle  15:43, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I disagree. Section 1 of the article reads: "Halligan was born on December 18, 1989 in Poughkeepsie, New York, the son of John P. and Kelly Halligan. His family moved to Essex Junction, Vermont, where Halligan attended Hiawatha Elementary School and, later, Albert D. Lawton Middle School. He was described by his father as a "gentle, very sensitive soul," who experienced some developmental delays affecting speech and physical coordination in his early school years. Although he overcame those difficulties by the fourth grade, "He still struggled; school was never easy to him, but he always showed up with a smile on his face, eager to do his best," said his father." This couldn't read more like a biography with its current wording.  The lede itself starts: "Ryan Patrick Halligan (December 18, 1989 – October 7, 2003) was an American student from Essex Junction, Vermont" which again reads like every article that is written as a biography. As far as the question of whether this image is appropriate, this is an article that is based on foo, and unless you would have an image of the boy after his suicide (perhaps from his funeral or wake), then I assert that this image is the best that we can offer as no other suitable replacement is available and this image's presence significantly increases readers' understanding of this topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.  Technical 13 (talk) 16:34, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Those details do not make it a biography, though it has more biographical detail than might be desirable. The article content is constrained by its title. It is about the young gentleman's suicide, not about his life. This, however, is not the place to go over those arguments in any detail. WHat is important is that a picture of him, an unfree one, is outside the rules for deployment of non free files. If a free file of him existed there would be a different discussion and I might hold a different view. We have to frame the discussion on copyright and non free material very precisely. There are legal implications of our getting it wrong. That is what the policy is about. Our role is to determine whether this picture fits within that policy. I contend that it does not. Fiddle   Faddle  17:01, 20 May 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 ⚡ 16:08, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The specific scenario on using those pictures in articles about those people's deaths has been discussed already. You are welcome to re-open the debate and debate it again, but it's good to read the previous discussions so you know what points have been covered. The Deletion review/Log/2011 December 5 deletion review was about this particular scenario. The relevant XFD was Files_for_deletion/2011_November_21. Because of the DRV of 2011 December 5, it became a keep. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:32, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The deletion review you link here was overturned because the closing admin inadvertently closed a discussion for an image he had originally nominated for deletion. I don't see anyone making a determination out of that discussion which is relevant to this debate. (ESkog)(Talk) 19:37, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * From the thread, the XFD it refers to should have been closed as a keep and it wasn't because of the admin's actions. We need the DRV to explain the real result of the XFD. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:50, 20 May 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:Dawnmariewesley.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 as fair use for one article. Diannaa (talk) 04:36, 25 July 2013 (UTC) Note also that this is an incorrect venue for review of a file already labelled as non-free. Diannaa (talk) 16:42, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * File:Dawnmariewesley.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * I do not feel that this file passes muster as a non free file. The article is about an event and is not a biography. While this is a very pleasant picture of the young lady it does not add to our understanding of her death. It serves, really, as a memorial, or as a curiosity. "So that is what the girl who killed herself looked like." But there is no rationale here for either having this picture in Wikipedia. Others own the copyright. The fact that she is dead and there is no obvious replacement is an excuse, not a reason to have it here. It does not pass at least WP:NFCC and it must pass every last one of those criteria to be valid here Fiddle   Faddle  15:28, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: Please review the following:
 * Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content/Archive_55
 * Deletion review/Log/2011 December 5
 * WhisperToMe (talk) 15:34, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The article is not about the person. It is abut the suicide of the person, an event. There is a substantial distinction between the two. If the article were a biographical article I would have a different view. Wikipedia policies for non free files are very clear. All of the criterai must be passed, not one of them and not some of them. We can not exhibit this file in this context, and, since it is not free, we may thus not exhibit it at all. Fiddle   Faddle  15:43, 20 May 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 ⚡ 16:08, 20 May 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:Kellyyeomans.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 as fair use for one article. Diannaa (talk) 04:35, 25 July 2013 (UTC) Note also that this is an incorrect venue for review of a file already labelled as non-free. Diannaa (talk) 16:42, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * File:Kellyyeomans.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * I do not feel that this file passes muster as a non free file. The article is about an event and is not a biography. While this is a very pleasant picture of the young lady it does not add to our understanding of her death. It serves, really, as a memorial, or as a curiosity. "So that is what the girl who killed herself looked like." But there is no rationale here for either having this picture in Wikipedia. Others own the copyright. The fact that she is dead and there is no obvious replacement is an excuse, not a reason to have it here. It does not pass at least WP:NFCC and it must pass every last one of those criteria to be valid here Fiddle   Faddle  15:29, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: Please review the following:
 * Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content/Archive_55
 * Deletion review/Log/2011 December 5
 * WhisperToMe (talk) 15:35, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The article is not about the person. It is abut the suicide of the person, an event. There is a substantial distinction between the two. If the article were a biographical article I would have a different view. Wikipedia policies for non free files are very clear. All of the criterai must be passed, not one of them and not some of them. We can not exhibit this file in this context, and, since it is not free, we may thus not exhibit it at all. Fiddle   Faddle  15:43, 20 May 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 ⚡ 16:08, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The specific scenario on using those pictures in articles about those people's deaths has been discussed already. You are welcome to re-open the debate and debate it again, but it's good to read the previous discussions so you know what points have been covered. The Deletion review/Log/2011 December 5 deletion review was about this particular scenario. The relevant XFD was Files_for_deletion/2011_November_21. Because of the DRV of 2011 December 5, it became a keep. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:32, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The deletion review you link here was overturned because the closing admin inadvertently closed a discussion for an image he had originally nominated for deletion. I don't see anyone making a determination out of that discussion which is relevant to this debate. (ESkog)(Talk) 19:37, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * From the thread, the XFD it refers to should have been closed as a keep and it wasn't because of the admin's actions. We need the DRV to explain the real result of the XFD. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:51, 20 May 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:ChucknorrisWALKofFAME.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 ⚡  19:11, 30 May 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Appears to be a photo of a photo. No indication that the original photographer released it. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:17, 20 May 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:Iraj Soleymani.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 ⚡  03:01, 6 July 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Sourced to Farsi Wikipedia, where my Chrome translator says the source and author are unknown. (ESkog)(Talk) 17:37, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The subject is free, uploaded in fa.wikipedia, published before 1982 (under Iranian copyright law). Tabarez (talk) 19:44, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * How do I verify the claim that the image was first published more than 30 years ago? Note that PD-Iran uses the date of publication, not the date of creation. There is not even any evidence that the photo was taken more than 30 years ago, for that matter. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:55, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Ask the original uploader for a full citation - name, date, publisher, ISBN, etc. Have the info in Farsi and translate it into English if necessary. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:17, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. Iraj Soleymani dies in 2009 at the age of 62. This image shows he is about 27 to 30 years old (before 1983) and Iranian law says image before 1983 are free. Tabarez (talk) 07:07, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The problem is that PD-Iran only applies to photos published before 1983. We have no way of telling whether this was published at that time or whether it remained unpublished in a drawer for a few decades. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:33, 21 May 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:Homayun Behzadi.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 ⚡  03:01, 6 July 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Source/author information is not sufficient to show that this meets PD-Iran. (ESkog)(Talk) 17:38, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The subject is free, uploaded in fa.wikipedia, published before 1982 (under Iranian copyright law). Tabarez (talk) 19:44, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * In which book or newspaper was it published before 1983? If it was published in a newspaper, on what date was the newspaper published? There is currently no way to verify that this was published more than 30 years ago, or even that it was taken more than 30 years ago. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:57, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Ask the original uploader for a full citation - name, date, publisher, ISBN, etc. Have the info in Farsi and translate it into English if necessary. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:18, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. Homayoun Behzadi is now 70 years old. You can easily search his current images which is different from the picture. This image is taken when he was head coach of Persepolis in 1975. Tabarez (talk) 07:09, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The problem is that PD-Iran only applies to photos published before 1983. We have no way of telling whether this was published at that time or whether it remained unpublished in a drawer for a few decades. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:32, 21 May 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:Hossein Kamali.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 ⚡  03:01, 6 July 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Original source on fa.wikipedia states that source/author are unknown, so no justification for PD claim. (ESkog)(Talk) 17:39, 20 May 2013 (UTC)


 * The subject is free, uploaded in fa.wikipedia, published before 1982 (under Iranian copyright law). Tabarez (talk) 19:44, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * In which book or newspaper was it published before 1983? If it was published in a newspaper, on what date was the newspaper published? There is currently no way to verify that this was published more than 30 years ago, or even that it was taken more than 30 years ago. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:57, 20 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Ask the original uploader for a full citation - name, date, publisher, ISBN, etc. Have the info in Farsi and translate it into English if necessary. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:18, 20 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. He is now 73 years old and image is from when he was 30. Tabarez (talk) 07:10, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * And next, I have mistake about file name. His name is Hossein Kalani not Kamali and if you can, correct it. Thanks. Tabarez (talk) 07:11, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The problem is that PD-Iran only applies to photos published before 1983. We have no way of telling whether this was published at that time or whether it remained unpublished in a drawer for a few decades. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:32, 21 May 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:Jafar Kashani.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 ⚡  03:01, 6 July 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Source at fa.wikipedia says source/author are unknown. (ESkog)(Talk) 17:40, 20 May 2013 (UTC)


 * The subject is free, uploaded in fa.wikipedia, published before 1982 (under Iranian copyright law). Tabarez (talk) 19:44, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * In which book or newspaper was it published before 1983? If it was published in a newspaper, on what date was the newspaper published? There is currently no way to verify that this was published more than 30 years ago, or even that it was taken more than 30 years ago. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:57, 20 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Ask the original uploader for a full citation - name, date, publisher, ISBN, etc. Have the info in Farsi and translate it into English if necessary. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:18, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * If this (and the others below) are free, then copy it to commons and we won't need the fa or the en versions  Ron h jones  (Talk) 21:48, 20 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. is free and taken before Iranian 1979 revolution. Tabarez (talk) 07:11, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The problem is that PD-Iran only applies to photos published before 1983. Even if the photo was taken before 1980, it might not have been published until later. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:31, 21 May 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:Safar Iranpak Persepolis.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 ⚡  03:01, 6 July 2013 (UTC)


 * File:Safar Iranpak Persepolis.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Source at fa.wikipedia says that source/author are unknown. (ESkog)(Talk) 17:40, 20 May 2013 (UTC)


 * The subject is free, uploaded in fa.wikipedia, published before 1982 (under Iranian copyright law). Tabarez (talk) 19:45, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * In which book or newspaper was it published before 1983? If it was published in a newspaper, on what date was the newspaper published? There is currently no way to verify that this was published more than 30 years ago, or even that it was taken more than 30 years ago. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:58, 20 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. This is belong to 1974 Tehran derby. Tabarez (talk) 07:12, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The problem is that PD-Iran only applies to photos published before 1983. Even if the photo was taken in 1974, it might not have been published until later. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:31, 21 May 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:Ebrahim Ashtiani.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 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 ⚡  03:01, 6 July 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Sourced to fa.wikipedia where the source/author are given as "unknown". (ESkog)(Talk) 17:41, 20 May 2013 (UTC)


 * The subject is free, uploaded in fa.wikipedia, published before 1982 (under Iranian copyright law). Tabarez (talk) 19:45, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * In which book or newspaper was it published before 1983? If it was published in a newspaper, on what date was the newspaper published? There is currently no way to verify that this was published more than 30 years ago, or even that it was taken more than 30 years ago. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:58, 20 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Ask the original uploader for a full citation - name, date, publisher, ISBN, etc. Have the info in Farsi and translate it into English if necessary. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:18, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is published in his official website in the section images during he was playing and he was retired from playing in 1976. Tabarez (talk) 07:13, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The problem is that PD-Iran only applies to photos published before 1983. Even if the photo was taken in or before 1976, it might not have been published until later. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:31, 21 May 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:Mohammad Panjali.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 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 ⚡  03:01, 6 July 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Sourced to fa.wikipedia where source and author are both listed as unknown; that's not sufficient for a PD claim. (ESkog)(Talk) 17:42, 20 May 2013 (UTC)


 * The subject is free, uploaded in fa.wikipedia, published before 1982 (under Iranian copyright law). Tabarez (talk) 19:45, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * In which book or newspaper was it published before 1983? If it was published in a newspaper, on what date was the newspaper published? There is currently no way to verify that this was published more than 30 years ago, or even that it was taken more than 30 years ago. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:59, 20 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Ask the original uploader for a full citation - name, date, publisher, ISBN, etc. Have the info in Farsi and translate it into English if necessary. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:18, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. Meysamin (original uploader in fa.wikipedia) only uploaded images under Iranian copyright law and I think this is before 1983. Tabarez (talk) 07:15, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The problem is that we need to show that it was published before 1983. We need the name of the book or the issue number of the magazine in which the image was published. Otherwise, there is no way to verify whether the image was published before 1983. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:29, 21 May 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:Abulhassan Navab.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 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 ⚡  03:01, 6 July 2013 (UTC)


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


 * The image this is cropped from, found here, appears to have some watermarking that may indicate copyright. I can't read Farsi so can't confirm, but the crop is suspicious. (ESkog)(Talk) 17:59, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The image comes from fa:پرونده:Big-05.jpg where there are some warnings (marked with Imbox deletion.png). No idea what the warnings mean as I don't speak Persian. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:01, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm Persian. The uploader says it's public domain but I can confirm this is free or not. Sorry. Tabarez (talk) 07:14, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment-The Persian Wikipedia warns that the copyright and the source of the file is unknown.Farhikht (talk) 13:28, 25 May 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:Alireza Zakani.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 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 as F9 by AnomieBOT ⚡  00:54, 21 May 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Cropped from an image with watermark which indicates original Commons uploader is unlikely to be the creator. (ESkog)(Talk) 18:01, 20 May 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:Mehdi Jafarpour.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 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 as F9 by AnomieBOT ⚡  15:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Cropped from this Commons image which is currently under discussion as a probable copyright violation. (ESkog)(Talk) 19:40, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * This and similar discussions shouldn't be closed until the discussion has been closed on Commons, and then the outcome should be the same as on Commons. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:04, 20 May 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:Mehdi Karimian.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 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 as F9 by AnomieBOT ⚡  15:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Cropped from this Commons file which is currently under discussion as a possible copyright violation. (ESkog)(Talk) 19:41, 20 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't know the uploader is the real publisher or not, I only cropped. Please wait until final discussion but I don't saw this images anywhere only in one website it's might be for the uploader. Tabarez (talk) 19:46, 20 May 2013 (UTC)


 * The link to Commons is wrong. It comes from File:Sepahan champions (2).jpg instead (which is up for deletion in the same deletion discussion on Commons). This discussion should be closed in the same way as the discussion on Commons. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:03, 20 May 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:Rahman Ahmadi.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 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 as F9 by AnomieBOT ⚡  15:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Cropped from this Commons file which is under discussion as a possible copyright violation. (ESkog)(Talk) 19:41, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. Until final discussion in commons. Tabarez (talk) 07:17, 21 May 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:Kranjcar in 2012.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 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 as F9 by AnomieBOT ⚡  15:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


 * File:Kranjcar in 2012.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Cropped from this Commons file, which is under discussion as a possible copyright violation (ESkog)(Talk) 19:42, 20 May 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:Mahmoud Karimi.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 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 as F9 by AnomieBOT ⚡  15:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Cropped from this Commons file which is currently under discussion as a possible copyright violation. (ESkog)(Talk) 19:43, 20 May 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:Kranjcar, head coach of Sepahan.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 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 as F9 by AnomieBOT ⚡  15:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


 * File:Kranjcar, head coach of Sepahan.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Cropped from this Commons file which is under discussion as a possible copyright violation. (ESkog)(Talk) 19:44, 20 May 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:Ahmad Jamshidian.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 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 as F9 by AnomieBOT ⚡  15:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Cropped from this Commons file which is under discussion as a possible copyright violation. (ESkog)(Talk) 19:45, 20 May 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:Akbar Imani.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 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 as F9 by AnomieBOT ⚡  15:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Crop from this Commons file which is under discussion as a possible copyright violation. (ESkog)(Talk) 19:46, 20 May 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:Hamid Reza Kazemi.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 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 as F9 by AnomieBOT ⚡  15:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


 * File:Hamid Reza Kazemi.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Crop from this Commons file which is under discussion for copyright violation. (ESkog)(Talk) 19:47, 20 May 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:Iran Pro League trophy.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 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 as F9 by AnomieBOT ⚡  15:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


 * File:Iran Pro League trophy.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Crop from this Commons file which is under discussion as a copyright violation. (ESkog)(Talk) 19:48, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Regardless of the outcome of the discussion on Commons, this is a derivative work of the trophy. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:05, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep until final discussion in the commons. Tabarez (talk) 07:18, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * PD-Iran-US-no-treaty (can't find the template, but I know there's one), this was originally published in Iran, for which there is no copyright treaty, meaning in the US, these photos are not protected, or other works from Iran (such as the trophy) ; original photo publication http://www.bartarinha.ir/fa/news/23360/%D8%AC%D8%B4%D9%86-%D9%82%D9%87%D8%B1%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%86%DB%8C-%D8%B3%D9%BE%D8%A7%D9%87%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%AF%D8%B1-%D9%84%DB%8C%DA%AF-%DB%8C%D8%A7%D8%B2%D8%AF%D9%87%D9%85-%D8%B9%DA%A9%D8%B3 from which this was cropped -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 00:17, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
 * See Wikipedia talk:Copyrights/Archive 14 where it was concluded that Wikipedia additionally should demand that such images are out of copyright in Iran, which means that they must have been published at least 30 years ago, which means that it is necessary to specify when and where the image was published so that the PD claim can be verified by other people. The link you gave seems to go to a page where it was published less than 30 years ago. --Stefan2 (talk) 09:24, 22 May 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:Bruno Correa.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 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 as F9 by AnomieBOT ⚡  15:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


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


 * crop from this Commons file which is under discussion as a copyright violation. (ESkog)(Talk) 19:49, 20 May 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:Alireza Marzban.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 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 as F9 by AnomieBOT ⚡  15:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Cropped from this Commons file which is under discussion as a copyright violation. (ESkog)(Talk) 19:50, 20 May 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:Omid Ebrahimi.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 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 as F9 by AnomieBOT ⚡  15:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


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


 * crop of this Commons file which is under discussion as a copyvio. (ESkog)(Talk) 19:51, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The link to Commons seems to be wrong. It doesn't seem to be cropped from that image but from a different image, unclear which one. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:07, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. It was mistake in the source page. I corrected it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by User: (talk • contribs)
 * I see that the source has been corrected, but that image is also up for deletion on Commons. In any case, these nominations need to wait for the Commons discussion to close, and then the outcome needs to be the same as on Commons. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:28, 21 May 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:Zlatko Kranjcar.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 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 as F9 by AnomieBOT ⚡  15:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Crop from this Commons file which is under discussion as a copyvio. (ESkog)(Talk) 19:52, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. I just recommended speedy delete over at commons. If they are truly the photographer then they should have no problem undeleting them.--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:25, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. until final discussion in the commons. Tabarez (talk) 07:05, 21 May 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:Clint Lowery 97.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 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 as F4 by AnomieBOT ⚡  16:10, 22 May 2013 (UTC)


 * File:Clint Lowery 97.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Copyright in watermark (upper right corner). Uploader has a history of copyright violations. Eeekster (talk) 21:46, 20 May 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:DavidRosen.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 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 as F8 by A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:01, 6 July 2013 (UTC)


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


 * A fair piece of the image contains 3D artwork. No Freedom of Panorama in US  Ron h jones  (Talk) 22:29, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. Clearly to artist knew he was posing with the piece and that the piece was being photographed. His consent is implied. Niteshift36 (talk) 22:37, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete He obviously consented to taking the photo, but we don't know whether he consented to publishing the image under a free licence. Also, we don't know where the image comes from, as no source has been specified. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:43, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * He doesn't need to. If he consented to the creation of a derivative work and did not specify terms for the use of that derivative work, then it's out of his hands.  The whole reason that we don't accept photos of statues is that they are UNAUTHORIZED derivative works.  This is an authorized derivative work and the photographer is free to do with it as he pleases.  I will, however, agree with you that there is no claim of authorship on the image description and so this should be deleted simply as an unsourced image. --B (talk) 22:27, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Convert to fairuse any work of his, without his explicit release, would require a FUR. Since he is an artist, we should have a sample of his work on his page, and with this photo, we do. -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 02:33, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. See: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Canoe1967/Sculptors for ways do deal with files like this.--Canoe1967 (talk) 02:38, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The uploader/photographer is obviously someone connected with David Rosen. Why not, instead of running straight here and templating the user, attempt to have a human conversation?  This discussion was opened a few hours after the image was uploaded.  The odds of a single purpose account sticking around after accomplishing its single purpose go down dramatically the more time passes and a generic template left to the user does nothing whatsoever to help the user understand what it is you're asking them to do. --B (talk) 22:27, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Apart from this image now being at Commons, there is an from David Rosen consenting to the sculpture appearing in the photo. I've also asked him to confirm the source of the photo. NtheP (talk) 20:32, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Update. David Rosen has confirmed the name of the photographer, this tallies with the information on the Commons image.  I suggest that this discussion is closed and the image here deleted under CSD#F8. NtheP (talk) 13:54, 19 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:Star in a Bra UK Logo 2013.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 1em 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 ⚡  19:11, 30 May 2013 (UTC)


 * File:Star in a Bra UK Logo 2013.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Logo used extensively at http://www.facebook.com/curvykate and various other web addresses.  Ron h jones  (Talk) 22:39, 20 May 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.