Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 July 24

< July 23	July 25 >

July 24[edit]

File:Adam Andrzejewski Press Release Photo.jpg[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 ⚡ 01:33, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The image claims in the title to be a press release photo and yet the uploader says that they are the copyright holder and that they are releasing it into the public domain. This is rather unusual as publicity photos are generally not released to the public domain. Dismas|^(talk) 02:44, 24 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.

File:NWoScottHall.jpg[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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:51, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very confusing licensing, but unlikely that uploader created. (ESkog)^(Talk) 04:47, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Image is from [1], and I have tagged the image as such. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 23:15, 24 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.

File:Wolfpac Sting.jpg[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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:51, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very confusing licensing, but unlikely that uploader created. (ESkog)^(Talk) 04:48, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Image is from [2] and not created or owned by the uploader. As such, I have tagged the image. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 23:09, 24 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.

File:NWoWolfpac.jpg[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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:51, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very confusing licensing, but unlikely that uploader created. (ESkog)^(Talk) 04:48, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Image is from [3] and not created or owned by uploader, and I have tagged the image as such. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 23:05, 24 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.

File:Outsiders.jpg[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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:51, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very confusing licensing, but unlikely that uploader created. (ESkog)^(Talk) 04:49, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Image is from [4], and not made or owned by the uploader. I have tagged the image as such. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 23:07, 24 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.

File:Sheikh Mujib and Indira Gandhi.jpg[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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:17, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is probably non-free image and uploader claim claim own work- Jayanta Nath ^{(Talk|Contrb)} 05:50, 24 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.

File:Mujibanagar cabinet.jpg[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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:17, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is probably non-free image and uploader claim wrong lincense and orphaned image- Jayanta Nath ^{(Talk|Contrb)} 05:51, 24 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.

File:Cookies andcream.JPG[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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:17, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This image appears to have come from a Rival Products (they make pots, pans, small appliances, etc.) catalog or recipe book. I found this in an archive of their web site. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 10:05, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This looks like a copyvio. I'd like to point out as well that Witchy2006 copied image information nearly verbatim from my upload that was the previous image. For me this raises the question as to whether they are the actual author. --BrokenSphere^{Msg me} 22:22, 28 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.

File:Hallgrímskirkja.jpg[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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:17, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Under Icelandic law, a photograph of a building is considered a derivative image and the building's copyright belongs to the architect, see Article 16 of the Icelandic Copyright Act. Copyright in Iceland does not expire until the 70th year following the death of the copyright holder (See Article 43). The architect of this building, Guðjón Samúelsson, died in 1950, therefore the copyright for images of this building still belong to Guðjón's estate until 2021. JD554 (talk) 13:09, 24 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.

File:Hallgrímskirkja and statue of Leifur Eiriksson.jpg[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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:17, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Under Icelandic law, a photograph of a building is considered a derivative image and the building's copyright belongs to the architect, see Article 16 of the Icelandic Copyright Act. Copyright in Iceland does not expire until the 70th year following the death of the copyright holder (See Article 43). The architect of this building, Guðjón Samúelsson, died in 1950, therefore the copyright for images of this building still belong to Guðjón's estate until 2021. JD554 (talk) 13:13, 24 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.

File:Leifur Ericcson 2.jpg[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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:17, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Under Icelandic law, a photograph of a building is considered a derivative image and the building's copyright belongs to the architect, see Article 16 of the Icelandic Copyright Act. Copyright in Iceland does not expire until the 70th year following the death of the copyright holder (See Article 43). The architect of this building, Guðjón Samúelsson, died in 1950, therefore the copyright for images of this building still belong to Guðjón's estate until 2021. JD554 (talk) 13:13, 24 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.

File:Hallgrímskirkja1, Reykjavík.jpg[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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:17, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Under Icelandic law, a photograph of a building is considered a derivative image and the building's copyright belongs to the architect, see Article 16 of the Icelandic Copyright Act. Copyright in Iceland does not expire until the 70th year following the death of the copyright holder (See Article 43). The architect of this building, Guðjón Samúelsson, died in 1950, therefore the copyright for images of this building still belong to Guðjón's estate until 2021. JD554 (talk) 13:15, 24 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.

File:Leif-Ericson-20050724.jpg[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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:17, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Under Icelandic law, a photograph of a building is considered a derivative image and the building's copyright belongs to the architect, see Article 16 of the Icelandic Copyright Act. Copyright in Iceland does not expire until the 70th year following the death of the copyright holder (See Article 43). The architect of this building, Guðjón Samúelsson, died in 1950, therefore the copyright for images of this building still belong to Guðjón's estate until 2021. JD554 (talk) 13:16, 24 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.

File:Logo of Miss São Tomé & Príncipe Universe.jpg[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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:17, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Highly unlikely that the uploader is the copyright holder. User is a likely sockpuppet of indef-blocked User:MRDU08. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 18:40, 24 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.

File:LilWes.jpg[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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:17, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Watermark on image would seem to indicate uploader does not hold copyright. Polly (Parrot) 18:51, 24 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.

File:Handel-Roubiliac.jpg[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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:17, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Photo of a 3D work of art, the statue is public domain but the photograph of it isn't. Polly (Parrot) 19:35, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have contacted User:VAwebteam, the WP coordinating team of the Victoria and Albert Museum, by email asking whether there are any problems, so please just wait a few days until they reply. The context of the different view of the sculpture has been explained to them. I have also conferred with Dirk Beetstra. Please look at VAwebteam's user page and await the response that they give to me by email (this is Beetstra's advice). They might later issue a OTRS ticket or a higher resolution image uploaded by them. At the moment they have been told about the new image as soon as it was created with the context, so we just have to wait. They have previously uploaded [[File:HandelVA.jpg]] but this does not show the pile of books on which Handel's left arm is resting. Mathsci (talk) 23:11, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry things seldom get quickly deleted on PUI. Polly (Parrot) 18:12, 25 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.

File:GenieProfile.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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:07, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promotional image, no evidence uploader holds copyright. Polly (Parrot) 19:55, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am the director of the company, Genie Sound Advice Pte Ltd, based in Singapore, and we are the management company for Genie, the subject in the photograph. We hired the photographer who shot a whole series of promotional photos in 2007, including the one in question, and we therefore hold the copyright to the photos. Vaughantan (talk) 07:50, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The permission, including the signed agreement of the photographer transferring copyright to you, should be sent in to [email protected]. Stifle (talk) 11:16, 15 September 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.

File:KE Profile Pic2.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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:07, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promotional image, no evidence uploader holds copyright. Polly (Parrot) 19:55, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am a member of the vocal group, Key Elements, in the photo who hired the photographer who shot the photo in May 2009, and as such hold the copyright to the photo. Vaughantan (talk) 07:54, 27 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.

File:Kuvempu University4.png[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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:17, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As stated in the summary, this is from http://www.kuvempu.ac.in/pgallery.htm. The user who uploaded this image has been indefinitely blocked for declining to discuss copyright issues with other images from this same site. WeisheitSuchen (talk) 20:05, 24 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.

File:KuvempuUniversityCampus.png[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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:17, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As per the summary, this image is from http://www.kuvempu.ac.in/pgallery.htm. No indication of license on the site; the user who uploaded it has been indefinitely blocked for copyright concerns with other images from this site. WeisheitSuchen (talk) 20:07, 24 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.

File:University of Kuvempu campus.jpg[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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:17, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As per the summary, this image is from http://www.kuvempu.ac.in/pgallery.htm. No indication of license on the site; the user who uploaded it has been indefinitely blocked for copyright concerns with other images from this site. WeisheitSuchen (talk) 20:08, 24 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.

File:Rajinikanth.JPG[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 discussion was: Deleted, previously published here and here, highly unlikely that the uplader owns copyright. Amalthea 20:46, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image likely sourced from a website:Small size and no metadata. Polly (Parrot) 20:34, 24 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.