Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2015 January 8



File:MK bag.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  04:02, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
 * File:MK bag.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Appeared on an ebay listing (second image in the listing, direct link) prior to upload here. Metadata states "Processed By eBay with ImageMagick". January  ( talk ) 11:14, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * ''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Bruce Henry.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by AnomieBOT ⚡  15:10, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
 * File:Bruce Henry.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * See c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:1377352 3434928728267 631360448 n Bruce-Henry-2.jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 19:42, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * ''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Coal scrip from Killarney West Virginia.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
 * File:Coal scrip from Killarney West Virginia.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * See c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Coal scrip from Killarney West Virginia.jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 19:47, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * The coal town of Killarney, West Virginia used coal scrip until the late 1940's. The maker of the tokens, has ceased existing. This token is coal scrip. The tokens themselves have zero value today with the exception of Exo numasticists who collect. After a search for a patent, at [here] NO PATENT was found.As this pre dates 1950, and could be construed as a unit of currency, I can see any reason for deletion. The image is used to show the veracity of the place Killarney being a coal town. KEEPCoal town guy (talk) 23:26, 8 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. [I copy my rationale from the Commons discussion] Under US copyright law of the period, currency definitely would have met the definition of being published.  Unless there's a copyright notice on the other side or on the edge, this is PD-US-no notice — I say keep because I can't imagine currency bearing a copyright notice.  Coal town guy needs to confirm that there's no copyright notice, but that's all we need.  Nyttend (talk) 23:57, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * There's probably no renewal anyway, if the object was out of use before the 1950s... --Stefan2 (talk) 00:05, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I have confirmed that there is NO copyright [here]. The maker of the token and the town that the token was used in have both ceased existing..TECHNICALLY, you could see some foundation stones until 2009, BUT the bulldozers got most of them I very very much appreciate the conversation hereCoal town guy (talk) 00:14, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
 * No, sorry: I want you to look at the edge and other side of the coin and confirm that neither one has any copyright notice. If that's the case, I wouldn't see a reason not to keep.  Nyttend (talk) 00:33, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Humor, I like that too. Believe it or not, one of the series of makers at one time also made chips in Vegas...Last I knew in about 1953, they smashed the dies. As fate would have it, they did not keep good records...probably why they no longer exist...Coal town guy (talk) 01:02, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I understand that they're no longer in existence, but it would help if you would confirm that there is no copyright notice on the coin itself. If you do this, we can keep it, but we absolutely need to know that it was not published with a copyright notice; it will need to be deleted if you don't.  Nyttend (talk) 14:12, 9 January 2015 (UTC)


 * OOOOPS, I got you...No the coin itself has no copyright. Specifically, its composition, its shape, its logo, nope, no copyright. As to the logo, looked for it specifically, no, the logo also has NO copyright POST 1978 as to before 1978, no maker is registered, nor is any note about shape or composition........AFTER inspection with a 10 power loop, there WAS a date of 1914, below the system word to the right, and per the pre 78 search, no patent or copyright has been foundCoal town guy (talk) 19:00, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
 * ''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:DLML quiet study.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  20:13, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
 * File:DLML quiet study.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * See c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:DLML quiet study.jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 21:42, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * ''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:DLML CIS collection.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted as F8 by A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
 * File:DLML CIS collection.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * See c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:DLML CIS collection.jpg. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:44, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. The source is a Flickr image.  It's scanned from a book published in Vienna in 1889, so the Flickr uploader's claim of copyright is irrelevant; we only need to consider copyright in the work itself.  I'm not sure what Austrian copyright law says here, but anything published in 1889 is PD-US.  It's definitely okay to keep here, and at worst we need to tag it with do not move to Commons.  Nyttend (talk) 00:07, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
 * If it was published in 1889, then it is PD-US-1923-abroad, yes. Thanks for finding the source! --Stefan2 (talk) 18:31, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. It looked like a book ("Tafel XLIX" would be meaningless in any context that didn't have at least 49 plates), so I ran a Google search for some of the phrases and found the Flickr page, even though somehow it didn't have the phrase I was looking for.  This done, finding the book was easy.  Nyttend (talk) 02:11, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
 * ''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Davidian Seventh Day Adventist Flag.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  20:13, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
 * File:Davidian Seventh Day Adventist Flag.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * See c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:SR Flag Final A (3).JPG. Stefan2 (talk) 22:51, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete; I initially understood it as being a scan from the tract (as if the tract had a photo of the flag flying), but it looks like the tract simply depicts the flag itself. Delete because there's no evidence of permission whatsoever for the photo, but if Presenttruth777 claims authorship, we should be safe; we'd need to check renewal records, but I doubt that religious tracts generally had copyright renewed.  Nyttend (talk) 00:11, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
 * ''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.