Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 July 13
July 13
[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⚡ 01:15, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like a publicity photo. I suspect this was taken from elsewhere without permission. J Milburn (talk) 11:55, 13 July 2009 (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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Appears to be a scan from a book and therefore a derivative work. From the title, I am guessing the book is from 1941 which means there is no evidence of public domain. The image illustrates a medical condition, so could be replaced by an image of someone with the actual medical condition, therefore fair use not applicable. Wknight94 talk 12:28, 13 July 2009 (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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot see any reason to believe this image is under a Creative Commons license. J Milburn (talk) 13:55, 13 July 2009 (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 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 J Milburn (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 16:09, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looks to be a scan of an older sketch. I doubt the uploader owns the rights to this work. J Milburn (talk) 13:57, 13 July 2009 (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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Web resolution, no meta-data, hosted in at least one other place on the 'net. I doubt the uploader owns the right to this image. J Milburn (talk) 14:00, 13 July 2009 (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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Image appears to be of a much older sketch. I doubt the uploader owns the rights to this image. J Milburn (talk) 14:40, 13 July 2009 (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 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⚡ 01:03, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like a publicity photo. I doubt the uploader owns the rights to this file. J Milburn (talk) 15:18, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Received Ticket:2009071310074644 concerning this. Some clarification has been requested. Stifle (talk) 21:30, 13 July 2009 (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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like an old sketch. I doubt the uploader owns the rights to this image. J Milburn (talk) 15:20, 13 July 2009 (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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Images from Google Earth are not in the public domain. J Milburn (talk) 15:28, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for informing me about the File:Balhaf-Bir Ali.jpg . Indeed I use Google Earth on my computer, copy the required images and then modify them (combine, add labels, ..etc). I thought that Google Earth images are free as long as they will not be used for commercial use as by Google policy. Could you please give me the correct category for such work?--Email4mobile (talk) 18:00, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I've replied on your talk page. J Milburn (talk) 21:10, 13 July 2009 (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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like an old sketch. I doubt the uploader owns the rights to this image. J Milburn (talk) 15:29, 13 July 2009 (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 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 YellowMonkey (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:10, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt the uploader owns the rights to this old looking file, source website contains no copyright details. J Milburn (talk) 15:40, 13 July 2009 (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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Source website says "The author intended not to use any copyrighted material for the publication or, if not possible, to indicate the copyright of the respective object. The copyright for any material created by the author is reserved. Any duplication or use of such diagrams, sounds or texts in other electronic or printed publications is not permitted without the author's agreement." I see no reason to believe this image is PD. J Milburn (talk) 21:03, 13 July 2009 (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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 00:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like a publicity photo. Uploader of this version claimed "all rights reserved" in an edit summary, but left the earlier (clearly false) claim of GFDL/CCbySA-self. J Milburn (talk) 22:26, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- This picture was edited by myself in photoshop. I have rights to the picture through Telestream. If the file name has already been used then I can change it, I have no problem with that. But if this is the case then I think that Wikipedia should not allow files with the same name to be uploaded and overwritting them. It is not a publicity photo, it just simply shows the different versions of a product in one picture. --Ballplyr86 (talk) 22:47, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Who does the copyright belong to? Who created the original image? J Milburn (talk) 00:22, 14 July 2009 (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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The watermarking on the image is making me suspect the "self-made" claim is dubious. J Milburn (talk) 23:15, 13 July 2009 (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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Source website is all rights reserved, not CC. J Milburn (talk) 23:31, 13 July 2009 (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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I see no reason to consider this image free. Source website is all rights reserved. J Milburn (talk) 23:37, 13 July 2009 (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 debate of the proposed deletion of the media 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: kept w/ PD-pre78 template updated. Skier Dude (talk) 05:00, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Film dates to the late thirties, therefore the PD tag cannot be legitimate. J Milburn (talk) 23:54, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The PD tag states that it was published without a copyright notice before 1978, so of course it could be legitimate. It was a very standard practice not to include copyright notices on old movie trailers. IronGargoyle (talk) 13:24, 14 July 2009 (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⚡ 03:10, 16 July 2009 (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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.