Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2012 March 30
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
March 30
[edit]- 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⚡ 02:04, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Dubious own work. Besides, the name suggests that it is a thumbnail dupe of some other image. Stefan2 (talk) 00:05, 30 March 2012 (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.
- 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⚡ 02:04, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Old Barolo in Cellar.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- I'm taking this to PUF instead of using DI tags because I find the tagging so confusing and I feel that I need to write a motivation. It says that "Michael K., Tripwolf uploaded travel photo, free license and public domain image." One could interpret this to mean that the copyright holder has released the image to the public domain. However, there is no way to confirm that the uploader and the copyright holder are the same. If this isn't the case, OTRS is needed. Stefan2 (talk) 00:11, 30 March 2012 (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.
- 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⚡ 02:04, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- File:PNE 2012 Kit.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Looks copied from here with some photoshopping to change the background colour Stuart.Jamieson (talk) 06:21, 30 March 2012 (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.
- 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⚡ 02:04, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The "Report a Problem" watermark in the bottom left corner suggests a Google Streetview image Stuart.Jamieson (talk) 06:27, 30 March 2012 (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.
- 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⚡ 02:04, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Holmes-Lancashire.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Given the nature of some of this editor's other uploads, the slight artefact at the bottom of this image suggests this is another Google street view image and the artefact is where neighbouring images are patched together. Stuart.Jamieson (talk) 06:35, 30 March 2012 (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.
- 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⚡ 02:04, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- File:St.Andrews-Longton.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Cropped from [[1]] Stuart.Jamieson (talk) 06:41, 30 March 2012 (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.
- 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⚡ 02:04, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Ljubljanalandmarks.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).
- This composite image contains photos of objects that are copyrighted (the author died after 1944) in Slovenia and that may be photographed only for non-commercial use (see commons:Commons:FOP#Slovenia). The object in the right image of the middle row (Parliament building) is a work of Vinko Glanz, who died in 1977, and sculptures at the portal of it are works of Zdenko Kalin (died in 1990) and Karel Putrih (died in 1959). The right image in the third (bottom) row depicts the Triple Bridge, work of Jože Plečnik, who died in 1957. Also the image of the Ljubljana Dragon in the bottom left corner is a copyvio, because the creator of the dragon Jurij Zaninović died in 1946. According to the Slovenian copyright law, these works will become public domain only 70 years after the author's death. Eleassar my talk 07:27, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Slovenian buildings are not a problem here since you can use {{FoP-USonly}} for that.
The dragon sculpture makes the image a copyvio, andI havealsonominated the source image for deletion on Commons, see Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ljubljana dragon.JPG. Only two of the images in the collage are sourced, so I would say that the image is insufficiently sourced. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:50, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Does this mean that Slovenian buildings can be freely uploaded to Wikipedia even if they're copyrighted and commercial photography needs a consent of the author in Slovenia? If it does, why is this possible? Is it so only for the English Wikipedia? --Eleassar my talk 19:26, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Please see the discussion at Template talk:FoP-USonly. English Wikipedia only requires images to be free in the United States whereas Commons also requires them to be free in Slovenia. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:05, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you. --Eleassar my talk 07:30, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Please see the discussion at Template talk:FoP-USonly. English Wikipedia only requires images to be free in the United States whereas Commons also requires them to be free in Slovenia. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:05, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Does this mean that Slovenian buildings can be freely uploaded to Wikipedia even if they're copyrighted and commercial photography needs a consent of the author in Slovenia? If it does, why is this possible? Is it so only for the English Wikipedia? --Eleassar my talk 19:26, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment At Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ljubljana dragon.JPG, I learnt that the statue was erected while Ivan Hribar was the mayor of Ljubljana, which means that the statue was installed in or before 1910. This makes the statue {{PD-US-1923-abroad}}, which is enough for English Wikipedia (but not for Commons). There is still the issue that lots of images in the collage are unsourced, so it still needs to be deleted. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:07, 2 April 2012 (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.
- 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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons. Please nominate it for deletion there if you feel it is non-free. AnomieBOT⚡ 09:07, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Image is found in the URL:http://moviegalleri.net/2011/01/vijay-ajith-photos-mangatha-shooting-spot-ajith-vijay-meet-stills.html Jenith (talk) 08:57, 30 March 2012 (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.
- 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⚡ 02:04, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Longton-Marsh-2008.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Cropped from [2] Stuart.Jamieson (talk) 09:02, 30 March 2012 (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.
- 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 Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:02, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- File:NeneNui-MartinMere.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Given the number of Copyvio's by this editor I suspect this to be non-free as well so I am marking it Possibly unfree - if so it will probably be from Panoramio but there are so many in the immediate are I can't see the specific one it's taken from. Stuart.Jamieson (talk) 09:07, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Flickr, not Panoramio.[3] --Stefan2 (talk) 15:52, 30 March 2012 (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.
- 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 G7 by Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:02, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Copyright tag obviously wrong, but I can't find the source. Stefan2 (talk) 15:12, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Stefan2 - you might be right. I'm new to this, and have screwed up :( If you are an admin, please could you delete this image? I'll go an take a proper one at a future date. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zadacka (talk • contribs) 15:16, 30 March 2012 (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.
- 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⚡ 02:04, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- File:LG GW620 image.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Screenshot is possibly copyrighted by phone/OS manufacturer. Kelly hi! 17:06, 30 March 2012 (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.
- 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⚡ 02:04, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Leopard-Spotted Gecko.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Unable to verify source/license of photo. Kelly hi! 18:36, 30 March 2012 (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.
- 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. Given the nature of this photo, there's little compelling evidence to assume that the person who took the picture doesn't also own the copyright to the picture being projected. — ξxplicit 23:43, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- No copyright status given on projected photo. Kelly hi! 18:41, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Does there need to be? The person has released the image under an accepted license. Surely the part of the image that is the projected image also falls under that license. The only problem would seem to be if the user did not own the rights to that image in the first place and so was unable to release it under the CC license. It's true that the Flickr user gives no evidence that they own the rights apart from the fact that they have uploaded the image under the license but that could be said for the bulk of Flickr sourced images on Wikipedia - any kind of proof of ownership beyond the upload itself is not usually required. Guest9999 (talk) 20:31, 4 April 2012 (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.
- 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⚡ 02:04, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Source page at Flickr contains the following statement: "This Photograph is under the ownership & copyright by Rithauddin spirits. No photograph may be reproduced, downloaded, copy, stored, manipulated, without the permission from the owner." Kelly hi! 19:06, 30 March 2012 (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.
- 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⚡ 02:04, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Primary focus of photo seems to be on copyrighted designs by the clothing designer. Kelly hi! 21:52, 30 March 2012 (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.
- 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. I think it's safe to say that the leaves in this logo are not complex enough to meet the threshold of originality. — ξxplicit 21:26, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Logo For Zevia.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Are the leaves really simple enough for {{PD-textlogo}}? Stefan2 (talk) 22:43, 30 March 2012 (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.