Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 December 24
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
December 24[edit]
File:Gottwald better.jpg[edit]
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 08:14, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Gottwald better.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Tagged as "PD-CzechGov" which seems to be highly restrictive - and under some debate on Commons. I would think it's pretty unlikely we could defend this as a state symbol and symbol of a regional self-governing unit as required by the template. Additionally, this is replaceable by the unquestionably free File:Klement Gottwald (20. léta).gif. (ESkog)(Talk) 07:10, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- As im say, nominating to deletion on only misunderstanding, and photo from beggingn of century ot not good --77.48.153.172 (talk) 08:10, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note that the discussion on Commons appears to have concluded that the original source image was not in fact public domain, which would mean this one isn't either. (ESkog)(Talk) 20:39, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- 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:Photolarge.strausz-hupe.jpg[edit]
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 08:14, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- No evidence that the sourced page is a US government agency; in fact, the copyright notice at the bottom of the page would seem to contradict this claim. (ESkog)(Talk) 07:13, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- 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:Dr. Rafiq Hussain.jpg[edit]
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 08:14, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Dr. Rafiq Hussain.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- It's rather doubtful that this image is the uploader's work, other than maybe the cropping. I don't believe the uploader holds the copyright or has the right to publish it under the CCAS license. Fred the Oyster (talk) 15:48, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.