Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 September 22

< September 21	September 23 >

September 22

File:Green Album Recording Weezer.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 Angusmclellan (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Green Album Recording Weezer.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

The Wayback Machine does not make material public domain simply by archiving it. dave pape (talk) 00:13, 22 September 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:Dosia1.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 Angusmclellan (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dosia1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:AlexMaher1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs)

File:Mario1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs)

File:DandA 2004 Cover.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs)

File:HC-front.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs)

File:Dna6-with-bot1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs)

All unused images. Promo shots and CD covers. Soundvisions1 (talk) 00:28, 22 September 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:Alfaradiodf.gif

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 Angusmclellan (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Alfaradiodf.gif (delete | talk | history | logs).

Unused logo - a variation of File:Alfamexico.JPG Soundvisions1 (talk) 01:03, 22 September 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:Major General Muhammad Alam Khattak.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Major General Muhammad Alam Khattak.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

Uploader claims this image of Lieutenant General Muhammad Alam Khattak form the Pakistan Army came from Congresswoman Betty McCollums' website. I can't find it there. This cropped from another source and am suspicious it came from the United State Congress as it it PD tagged as. Soundvisions1 (talk) 01:28, 22 September 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:Khmerclassicaldancedramaperformer.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Khmerclassicaldancedramaperformer.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Cambodia is 50 years pma for all works (proof). This should almost certainly be FU. Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:59, 22 September 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:Buttergr.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.

{{PD-ineligible}} apparently. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:55, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Buttergr.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Unless this is pd-ineligible (thoughts anyone?), then this is not public domain- printed October 1930, author died 1958. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:01, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Looks PD-ineligible to me. It's a simple representation of a mathematical equation, no artistic intent/effort was used.-_GrapedApe (talk) 05:38, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree this look like PD-ineligible to me.--ARTEST4ECHO ^talk 20:23, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with the previous statements: it's simple enough that this information probably couldn't be graphed in any other way. Nyttend (talk) 14:52, 29 September 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:J I Thornycroft.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: keep but revert to old version. Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:16, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:J I Thornycroft.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Not enough information is provided the summary to determine if this is in the public domain either abroad or in the US. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:18, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but revert to the originally uploaded file (and then a better version of that image uploaded) and delete the current photograph. It is easy enough to find details on the Vanity Fair image. This was published, see here, circa 1910 and is the work of Leslie Ward. Thus, this is PD in the US due to pre-1923 publication, and also PD in the UK as the creator died in 1922.About the photograph, no ideas. Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:12, 6 October 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:Jorge Isaacs.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jorge Isaacs.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

not enough information given to prove this is PD, but given that author still lives, the PD-tag is certainly not correct. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:25, 22 September 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:Schwarzenberg Arms.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Schwarzenberg Arms.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

The source given attributes the image to Carl-Alexander von Volborth, Heraldik - eine Einführung in die Welt der Wappen. I noticed it because it is exceedingly similar to fig.900 (p.158) in Volborth's book Heraldry: Customs, Rules and Styles (1981), except that the latter is hatched rather than colored. The contributor is User:Johnpallen, who was soon afterward banned for hoaxing (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fürsts of Schwarzenberg; Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Earl of Amersham). —Tamfang (talk) 03:55, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The source listed on the upload references "Illustration aus: Carl-Alexander von Volborth, Heraldik - eine Einführung in die Welt der Wappen". Mr. von Volorth pasted away in 2009. I may have the book at home, somewhere if necessary to check.--CSvBibra (talk) 15:56, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I couldn't get the notice to appear properly in House of Schwarzenberg#Coat of arms. —Tamfang (talk) 19:35, 29 September 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:King35.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:King35.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Uploader asserts "not copyrighted" without giving explanation on original date for photo, nor how lack of copyright was determined. Source is down, cannot cross check. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:37, 22 September 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:Edith Harcum 1937.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Edith Harcum 1937.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

A 70 year old image uploaded as PD-self. Highly unlikely that the uploader was the author of the image, which dates to 1937. GrapedApe (talk) 03:43, 22 September 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:Harcum College Bear.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Harcum College Bear.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Official college mascot. Unlikely that the uploader was authorized to release it into PD. GrapedApe (talk) 03:43, 22 September 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:Kapral2.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kapral2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

There is not enough information provided by uploader to prove this is PD; in fact, it probably isn't. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:48, 22 September 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:Old Palacio Postal, Mexico City.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Old Palacio Postal, Mexico City.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

uplaoder doesn't provide enough information about date of creation/publication or author information to determine PD status. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:55, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I had a look at the original source [www.tablada.unam.mx/archivo/fotograf/notas/i134-4v-30.html], available on archive.org. It isn't wonderfully informative but it tells us enough to know that it is mathematically impossible for this to be free in Mexico. Mexico has a 100 year pma term and the building shown was not completed until 1910. So, the [unknown] creator of this image would have to have died before it could have been taken for it to be free. It could be free in the US because of pre-1923 publication, but the source gives no encouragement to that idea. Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:07, 1 October 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:Ironworkers Memorial collapse.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ironworkers Memorial collapse.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

likely not PD in Canada, almost certainly not in US Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:57, 22 September 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:Roslavet.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. — ξ ^xplicit 06:45, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Roslavet.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

I do not see this is PD in the US or abroad (the 50 years tag doesn't necessarily appear to be correct). See also Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nikolai Roslavets.jpg. Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:22, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
From the style, one might take this to be a pre-1917 image, but given what it says about Roslavets (note the 1924 biography), it would be an unjustifiable leap of faith to conclude that this was published pre-1917 and was {{PD-RusEmpire}}. It may well be in the public domain under point 2 of {{PD-Russia-2008}}. Were we to judge copyright questions on reasonable doubt, rather than the pretence of legalistic certainty that prevails, at least when fanboys and fangirls aren't involved to vote in numbers, I would apply that tag. Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:15, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If the work is anonymous, then it is certainly {{PD-US-1996}}, as it was published before 1946. However, if it's not anonymous, then the author would have had to have died before that date. Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:20, 6 October 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:Milllane.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Milllane.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

I don't see how we can prove this is in the public domain; additionally, neither license (URAA or pd-old-50) appears to apply. Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:26, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Unless, which seems unlikely, this image is Crown Copyright it is assuredly not in the public domain. Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:20, 1 October 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:Pitzer logo 700x300.gif

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pitzer logo 700x300.gif (delete | talk | history | logs).

Official college logo was uploaded as GFDL-self. No evidence that the uploader was authorized to do so by Pitzer College. Uploader (Harpweaver has a history of uploading stuff under bogus licenses. GrapedApe (talk) 05:26, 22 September 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:Villageview2007.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Villageview2007.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

One of several images uploaded by this user with different names listed as the source, but all tagged as PD-self. (ESkog)^(Talk) 12:43, 22 September 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:Desert view.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Desert view.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

One of several images uploaded by this user with different names listed as the source, but all tagged as PD-self. (ESkog)^(Talk) 12:43, 22 September 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:View from fort.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:View from fort.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

One of several images uploaded by this user (this one has no source listed), but all tagged as PD-self. (ESkog)^(Talk) 12:44, 22 September 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:Middlesex circle.jpeg

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 Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:41, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Middlesex circle.jpeg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Different resolution version of the image at http://cdn.media34.whipplehill.net/ftpimages/116/podium/task/task_100002_180.jpg VernoWhitney (talk) 12:44, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This image qualifies for speedy deletion per F9. Unambiguous copyright infringement.--ARTEST4ECHO ^talk 20:21, 22 September 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:Middlesex clocktower3.jpeg

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 Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:41, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Middlesex clocktower3.jpeg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Scaled down version of http://www.mxschool.edu/ftpimages/116/text/large_text18556_10473.jpg VernoWhitney (talk) 12:44, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This image qualifies for speedy deletion per F9. Unambiguous copyright infringement.--ARTEST4ECHO ^talk 20:21, 22 September 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:Chhatri(cenotaph).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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chhatri(cenotaph).jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

One of several images uploaded by this user with different names listed as the source, but all tagged as PD-self. (ESkog)^(Talk) 12:44, 22 September 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:Shekhawati tourist map.gif

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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Shekhawati tourist map.gif (delete | talk | history | logs).

Tourist map of a region; appears not to be user-created. (ESkog)^(Talk) 12:44, 22 September 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:Image(005).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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Image(005).jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

"Permission: none"! Bad quality and not used anyway. Leyo 14:31, 22 September 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:Into the woods.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 Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:41, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Into the woods.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Appears to be derivative from image at https://www.mxschool.edu/podium/default.aspx?t=204&nid=171233. No indication of permission. VernoWhitney (talk) 14:46, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This image qualifies for speedy deletion per F9. Unambiguous copyright infringement.--ARTEST4ECHO ^talk 20:21, 22 September 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:Forgotten-bird-of-paradise-pacshot.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 debate was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Forgotten-bird-of-paradise-pacshot.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

Film poster, unlikely uploader is copyright holder. Acather96 (talk) 15:06, 22 September 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:Debiopharm correspondence.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Debiopharm correspondence.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Implausible uploader claim of copyright to Debiopharm corporate correspondence LeadSongDog come howl! 19:12, 22 September 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:Rosemarie Koczy Sculpture107 2002.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rosemarie Koczy Sculpture107 2002.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:Rosemarie Koczy Drawing48 Book193 2007.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:Rosemarie Koczy Painting156 1985.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:Rosemarie Koczy Tapestry Torah 1977.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:Rosemarie Koczy Drawing48 Book82 1997.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Photographing artwork doesn’t release the copyright of the original artwork. Unless the uploader can show that Emmanuel Yashchin is the copyright holder of the artwork (which would be the estate of the late Rosemarie Koczy) then these are unfree files --ARTEST4ECHO ^talk 20:09, 22 September 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:Binan.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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Binan.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

City logos from the Philippines do not fall under PD in the Philippines or the US. --ARTEST4ECHO ^talk 21:45, 22 September 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:Weeping-angel-flickr.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.

Derivative work as not covered by UK freedom of panorama: the exhibition wasn't permanent. Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:50, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Weeping-angel-flickr.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Tagged as Creative Commons Attribution 3.0, but source does not indicate any licence. It is also an object from a non-permanent exhebition and depicts a fictional 3D element from a copyrighted work. — Edokter • Talk • 23:03, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Whoah, someone's spiteful – [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] However, you are absolutely right that the image-source currently bears no mention of the license: however, I distinctly remember uploading it (to replace some copyrighted TV screenshots of the same figures), and recall finding it through searching Flickr with the 'Creative Commons' options set. It was definitely marked as whatever license I put on the page, at the time it was uploaded. And I think that they're non-revocable? ╟─Treasury Tag►ballotbox─╢ 12:52, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. Actually, Edokter is wrong on this occasion – there's a first time for everything, I guess... Tagged as Creative Commons Attribution 3.0, but source does not indicate any licence. To tell the truth, it does. Scroll down until the word 'license' shows on the right-hand margin of the image page and then click 'some rights reserved' – that clearly indicates that the image is available under a free license. I am also not clear what makes Edokter so certain that the image was taken in a non-permanent exhebition [sic] or that it is otherwise ineligible to be released under a CC banner. ╟─Treasury Tag►consulate─╢ 12:56, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The photograph is a two-dimensional representation of a three-dimensional work which, I understand, is copyright of the BBC. That may present a licensing problem if the BBC has not given permission for such derivative works to be freely distributed. @88.104.47.189 (talk) 15:13, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, according to Commons, it is "acceptable to upload to Commons not only photographs of public buildings and sculptures but also works of artistic craftsmanship which are on permanent public display in museums, galleries and exhibitions which are open to the public." Which I think applies to the various Doctor Who exhibitions around the place. ╟─Treasury Tag►Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster─╢ 13:06, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In this case, the exhibition wasn't permanent, so it fails that criterium. BTW, why didn't you upload it at Commons? — Edokter • Talk • 13:29, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) In this case, the exhibition wasn't permanent – ^{[citation needed]} – and I don't see why the fact that I didn't upload it to Commons is that relevant? I generally prefer uploading to en-wiki for a number of reasons. ╟─Treasury Tag►First Secretary of State─╢ 13:32, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you wish to justify the free license with a "permanent public display" defence, then you need to find a source to back that up (hint: the picture's taken at the London exhibition which closed in 2009, so there may be difficulties there). 88.104.32.195 (talk) 13:58, 24 September 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.