Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 September 25

< September 24	September 26 >

September 25[edit]

File:Drugs-PriceMarkUp2.jpg[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 PhilKnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:44, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Drugs-PriceMarkUp2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Fair use claim for a bar chart - but figures come from report anyway so easily reproduced. TheGrappler (talk) 01:52, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This image is currently tagged as non-free. If there is a dispute with the rationale, please tag the image with {{dfu}} or list it at WP:Non-free content review. Otherwise, unless there is another reason for listing here, the listing will be closed by an administrator and the image kept. AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:36, 3 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.

Screenshots by User:TextCreator[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. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 04:43, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pictures.png

File:Text retrieval.jpg

File:Memo Manager.jpg

File:Screenshot MAXMaps Model.jpg

File:Code Relations Browser.jpg

File:Lexical search.jpg

File:ScreenVideoTranscription.jpeg

File:Screenshot PDF (eng).png

Screenshots, presumably with non-free content. — ξ ^xplicit 02:49, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I say crop the images that do contain some public domain information when the only details eligible for copyright are the program itself. mechamind 9 0 19:47, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Currently some are only used in a user-space sandbox(s). (And misplaced/used in one sandbox where File:Pictures.png is described as "Hurley meets Abaddon at the mental institution") There is also doubt that the uploader own the copyright on the software, or various images contained within the screen grabs. (i.e - File:ScreenVideoTranscription.jpeg contains a screen shot of the software as well as an image of a video. In the context of what it is removing the software and the video would render the purpose of the screen grab null.) Soundvisions1 (talk) 20:55, 28 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:Albrizio portrait.JPG[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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:54, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Albrizio portrait.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

Appears to be a professional portrait, no indication that the uploader owns the copyright. — ξ ^xplicit 03:16, 25 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:Alternative Cover.jpg[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 ⚡ 01:53, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Massively confusing - described as "(C) by the band" - sourced as "facebook" and templated as PD-self Skier Dude (talk 04:06, 25 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:GeneralMichelAoun.jpg[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 ⚡ 01:36, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Eli + 12:19, 25 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:AlLohman.jpg[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: keep per uploader's complete assertion. Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:28, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

The summery says "Q-103 Monthly Newsletter November 1990," that is very important as to the source. If you look over the history the origianl uploader said the newsletter had no copyright, than BirgitteSB tagged the image and, correctly, said that "photographer/scanner is not the copyright holder in this case". The uploader than changed the original summary and said "Photograph taken by uploader." While the image may belong to the uploader the newsletter scan does not, one can not scan these and upload them as {{pd-self}}. Skier-dudes tagged it after I used the correct tag and than mechamind90 removed. I reverted, explaining why, to them and they removed it again saying this time it is GFDL, not PD-self. That is still not a correct license - Unless Q-103 submits an OTRS the only way this image can be used would be to claim fair use. Soundvisions1 (talk) 13:21, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do believe that they gave their consent to be published since it was in a newspaper. The image there also does not appear to contain trademarked text from the newspaper company itself. mechamind 9 0 16:51, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If someone can produce an OTRS number that would help. Soundvisions1 (talk) 20:56, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to drop the uploader a note that the license needs to be more specific. Who took the image? Why does the uploader know it's free licensed if the image was not taken by the uploader? If he cannot answer the question in the next few days, I will be forced to delete it. Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:11, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the uploader. I'm also the photographer and the publisher of the newsletter. This was for a small in-house newsletter. No more than 20 copies were run, and there was never a copyright notice attached. Q-103 sold out to a large media conglomerate in 1999, and is no longer in business. I've typed this to so many people that I can do it in my sleep now. :) I change the license to indicate it's my property and it keeps getting changed back. Can you help me with this, Magog? I would sure appreciate it. Regards, --Manway (talk) 02:16, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's good enough, Manway. We just needed to know that you were the photographer and held the copyright. My suggestion is: when uploading images in the future that might be unclear, attach a note under the "permissions" section stating "I created this image for the newsletter which I wrote, and I release it under the above license." The problem is that often people will do something like upload content from a newsletter that they receive, and mark it as self-created just because they scanned the image. I'm marking this as closed. Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:28, 9 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:UK Election Map 2001.png[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 Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:54, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:UK Election Map 2001.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

Appears to be copyvio of http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote2001/results_constituencies/pol_map.stm. Other map uploads by this user may be suspect. Marcus Qwertyus 22:46, 25 September 2010 (UTC) Marcus Qwertyus 22:46, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The maps I have uploaded were created by a friend of mine who planned to use them in a book about UK general elections. However, he abandoned the project and subsequently said I could have them. The 2001 map was the exception, I did not look into it's source for which I apologise however I have now replaced it with one of the images created by my friend. I hope this matter is now resolved, although if you have any other queries surrounding the copyright status of my images then please feel free to address them. MWhite 23:11, 25 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwhite148 (talk • contribs)

As an aside most of the images you have uploaded have been marked with you as author and creator which does not appear to be true, really they should all have some sort of release through OTRS from your friend the copyright holder. MilborneOne (talk) 14:20, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So what copyright template should I use and what details should I include in the descriptions of the maps to assert this? MWhite 19:05, 26 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwhite148 (talk • contribs)

First you should transfer all your files on this Wikipedia to Wikimedia commons. You can then use the process described on commons:OTRS to secure permission with the author. You must have the author explicitly state in the email which license he wants it to be licensed as. Marcus Qwertyus 12:42, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's still a map, therefore I do not believe it qualifies for copyright to require a fair-use rationale. I also believe it might meet the criteria for the Wikimedia Commons. mechamind 9 0 03:34, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

as all these maps are identical to those on the vision of Britain website (see here) and that website claims that the content is copyrighted, is the copyright status of these maps appropriate for the wiki? 129.234.75.242 (talk) 16:16, 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.