Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 November 22

< November 21	November 23 >

November 22[edit]

File:Royaltern76.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: Kept Yup. It's PD. Identifies a district staff member took it. --Elvey (talk) 07:09, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Royaltern76.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

The source that the picture asserts it is from is a dead link, so there is no longer a way to verify if it came from the Fish and Wildlife Service. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 05:53, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a valid reason to delete. --Elvey (talk) 19:36, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if it did come from the FWS, then the deadlink prevents us from verifying its copyright status. Moreover, the FWS asks us to use these images on the condition that we cite the photographer responsible for taking the picture, and a deadlink is not sufficient information as to who it is that would have taken this picture. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 01:28, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - the original page on which the image was located is at [1] (CTRL-F to search for "0476" on the page); that page is still up, although the image is not. Based on the email at the bottom of the page, it appears it was taken by a Patrick Lynch. Magog the Ogre (talk) 15:42, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per my comment above, this looks legit. Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:55, 7 December 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:Oldholyfam.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 Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:44, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Uploader indicated source as http://www.holyfamily.org.sg, and that website has a "© 2005" at the bottom. No indication that uploader was authorized to release the image into the public domain, and insufficient information provided about the date of the photograph to determine whether it has entered the public domain. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 07:45, 22 November 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:Mount Vernon, NY Police HQ.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: Delete all. someone shouyld get the few that worked their way to commons.... After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 00:38, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All files were uploaded by Maturelife1, yet several of the images list different authors. For example, File:Mount Vernon, NY Police HQ.jpg is attributed to Austin Diedrich, File:AB Davis Middle School - Mount Vernon, New York.jpg to Michelle Florence, File:Avondale station.jpg to Samuel Spring. No indication that the uploader is any of these people, and without any evidence of permission, these can all be copyright violations. — ξ ^xplicit 09:32, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wish I know what Maturelife1's story is behind this, because a lot of the images are half-way decent. ----DanTD (talk) 18:42, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We should not delete the ones with camera metadata, e.g. Avondale, at least not 'till we hear back, IMO. --Elvey (talk) 19:44, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Even the images with metadata show no indication that the uploader is the copyright holder. Metadata ≠ work of the uploader. Per WP:COPYVIO and keeping legal matters in mind, we should err to the side of caution and assume that all the uploads are copyright violations. — ξ ^xplicit 20:03, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In any case, I'd like to know where File:Rounda2.jpg is. I suspect it was in Atlanta, Georgia, but I'm not 100% sure. Many of these photos are of BART stations, Atlanta(especially MARTA stations), and Mount Vernon New York, including three Metro-North stations. I'm going to advocate replacement images on WikiProject Trains Image Task Force. ----DanTD (talk) 01:45, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does anybody have an idea of where File:Downtown CBD.JPG is? Also, where's the link to all the pics in the commons that are tagged for deletion? ----DanTD (talk) 19:11, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See my contributions at Commons on November 22, 2010. — ξ ^xplicit 06:55, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the list would look more like this one, but okay. In any case, I Went on TWP Image Task Force's discussion board, and called for replacements. I wish I could do the same for all the other images, and I wish I knew what Maturelife1's deal is. Maybe he or she works in a group home, and all the other names are property of his or her residents. Or maybe they're just friends of that user, who heard he/she was going on wikipedia, and said "add my pictures." Come on, Maturelife1. Speak up! ----DanTD (talk) 16:22, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One Note[edit]

The pic File:MT.jpg was originally by User:SGT141, and somehow is able to show up in both it's original form as police insignia, and the overlapped image of Downtown Mount Vernon. This one should be split, even if it's not deleted. ----DanTD (talk) 11:44, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE - I just reverted "MT" to it's original version, and removed the deletion tag. In the event that this and the others are found not to be copyright violations, it should go under another name. ----DanTD (talk) 19:00, 23 November 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:HERMES.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 After Midnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:11, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Given this user's blatant copyright infringment at File:Janetarzan.jpg, all of his claimed self-created submissions must be treated with suspicion. – Smyth\^talk 13:19, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Since File:Janetarzan.jpg has now been speedy-deleted, I will describe it for the benefit of non-admins. It was a publicity still from Tarzan (1999 film), about 800x600, with a burned in "(C) DISNEY" notice at the bottom. This user had uploaded it as PD self-created. – Smyth\^talk 12:29, 23 November 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:Chris Atkinson 2006 Rally Australia Dwellingup.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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons. Please nominate it for deletion there if you feel it is non-free. AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:13, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chris Atkinson 2006 Rally Australia Dwellingup.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

* Improbable authorship claims. Tineye finds 2 matches TucsonDavid (talk) 16:05, 22 November 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.