Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 February 7

< February 6	February 8 >

February 7[edit]

File:David Wilson Library MHK.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 Melesse (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:02, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:David Wilson Library MHK.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

No evidence that this file is actually licensed as CC-BY-SA going back to the source Web site. Likely copyvio. SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:43, 7 February 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:DECA QV-300-x600.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:12, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:DECA QV-300-x600.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

possible non-free because of the logos on this commercial product. IngerAlHaosului (talk) 13:29, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep there is nothing copyrightable in this image. — BQZip01 — ^talk 04:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note after closure; image was deleted as it now exists on the commons. — BQZip01 — ^talk 07:44, 12 March 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:Da Weasel.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 MBisanz (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:23, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Da Weasel.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

link to source is broken permission can't be verified IngerAlHaosului (talk) 13:34, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep All the author's photos before Aug 21 seem to have disappeared, but permission can't be revoked. Style, quality and substance are consistent with other photos by this author, all photos put up by that author were released under that license.--Crossmr (talk) 05:59, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Correction, they haven't disappeared. Flickr has changed their structure and not forwarded old links. You'll probably find tons of old images with broken links to flickr permissions. However some of his pre-august images are there, just not linked from his account [1].--Crossmr (talk) 06:04, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And another [2] it is quite apparent that most of his old photos have been locked up, possibly he had a pro account that expired.--Crossmr (talk) 06:09, 9 February 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:CasamayorVsKatsidis.png[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 ⚡ 02:29, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:CasamayorVsKatsidis.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

Please contact Commons:User:Eusebius about the veracity of the OTRS release on this. -Nard 13:48, 7 February 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:Danube bratislava.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 discussion was: Keep. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 01:08, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Danube bratislava.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

link to source is broken permission can't be verified IngerAlHaosului (talk) 15:24, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
keep another lazy nomination. Took me less than 15 seconds to view the flickr account search for the keyword "danube" on the account and find the photo licensed as described. [3].--Crossmr (talk) 05:46, 9 February 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:Das05-Mels Drive-In-x768.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:13, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Das05-Mels Drive-In-x768.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

freedom of panorama US only coves buildings the poster signs and the neon billboard are not. IngerAlHaosului (talk) 15:32, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Letters, no matter how complex, are not eligible for copyright protection in the United States. -Nard 01:04, 9 February 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:Das05-palladium-1-x768.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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:13, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Das05-palladium-1-x768.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Is the palladium sign covered by freedom of panorama US?? IngerAlHaosului (talk) 15:34, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. — BQZip01 — ^talk 04:08, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
More accurately stated, the letters in this sign and the overall design of it are not eligible for copyright protection in the United States. -Nard 01:03, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note after closure: Image was moved to commons. — BQZip01 — ^talk 07:45, 12 March 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:Nadey HakimSmall.png[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 ⚡ 02:29, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nadey HakimSmall.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

Referal of smaller version of image reffered previously Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:54, 7 February 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:Redteam.png[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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:08, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Redteam.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

Keep A website cannot copyright such rudimentary information. While the complete list is copyrightable, individual segments are merely text and factual information and, therefore, not eligible for copyright. — BQZip01 — ^talk 04:12, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
However, delete one of the duplicates. — BQZip01 — ^talk 04:13, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Ahhhhh Pd-text. Got it. Speedied the one that isn't being used. NativeForeigner ^Talk/_Contribs 05:33, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
NOTE AFTER CLOSURE This duplicate was deleted while the other image was kept. — BQZip01 — ^talk 19:19, 9 February 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.