Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2016 February 9
February 9
[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 discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:02, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- File:Uht entrance.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Photo licensed as "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0" and the uploader is claiming to be the copyright holder, but the image can be seen here on the website BallparkReviews.com which claims "All photos Copyright BallparkReviews.com". If the uploader is affiliated with the website or is the photographer who took the photo, then a declaration of consent email should be sent to WP:OTRS for verification. If the uploader is not affiliated with the website or did not take the photo, then a permissions email is needed from the original copyright holder for OTRS verification. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:52, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
- Note: Pinging @Mosmof: since they previously tagged the file with {{di-no source no license}} and may be able to provide some clarification as to whether is acceptable as currently licensed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:57, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
- Delete - unless the uploader can show that he can prove permission as the stated source site provided in the upload has an explicit copyright notice with no indication of a creative commons release. An OTRS ticket would be best, but having the site mark the photo with the appropriate license would also work. -- Whpq (talk) 15:49, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
- Yeah, I listed it as no source-no license, since there was no license information and the URL wasn't helpful in determining authorship. I left it alone after the user provided a license, but I endorse the deletion. And for what it's worth, it looks like the same image has been deleted from Commons. Mosmof (talk) 16:45, 11 February 2016 (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.
- 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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 02:02, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- File:ConnorLeimer2015.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- No ticket with number 20151130018135 found, nor any matching the string "Tim Duggan". Three tickets probably from the uploader found, none of which regard this photo. Storkk (talk) 11:40, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination Ticket:2015113010018135 now contains a {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}{{GFDL}} license from the photographer. Storkk (talk) 10:24, 15 February 2016 (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.
Two files
[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 discussion was: delete. — ξxplicit 00:18, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- File:India-trip1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- File:ORIRUKKAI MANIMANTAPAM - GANAPATI STHAPATHI.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
Two copies of the same file, one listed as own work by the uploader and the other one sourced to an external website. We are missing evidence that the file is own work by the uploader, and there is no evidence that the file is freely licensed. --Stefan2 (talk) 12:05, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
- Delete unless the uploader can establish they are the copyright holder. An OTRS ticket would be best, but a declaration on the blog indicating the image is released under the claimed free license would also work. -- Whpq (talk) 15:53, 10 February 2016 (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.
- 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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:02, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- File:Nabeel actor.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Uploaded by an editor with a long history of copyright violations. The metadata is from Adobe Photoshop and although they claim to have taken the picture themselves, it looks to be a screencap to me. Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:28, 9 February 2016 (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.