Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2013 February 18
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
February 18
[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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:04, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Dist Mil-Pilot GDR med.pdf (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Invalid PD reason. The copyright to a badge is not affected by a country ceasing to exist. Stefan2 (talk) 13:54, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. The copyright belongs to the uploader who took the photo. The comment about the GDR is irrelevant and should be removed. --Bermicourt (talk) 07:07, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The photographer only holds the copyright to the photo but not to the badge. See Commons:COM:DW. --Stefan2 (talk) 09:28, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment
(leaning Keep)West-German copyright rules apply per the unification treaty between West and East Germany for all former East German works. The West-German "Ehrenkreuz der Bundeswehr" (as similar example) is under "PD-GermanGov" on Commons. The PD-reason should probably be changed. GermanJoe (talk) 09:49, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]- According to Commons:Commons:WikiProject Public Domain/German stamps review, a German court decided that {{PD-GermanGov}} only applies to text. This is not text.
| “ | In the Loriot stamps case decision the Landgericht Berlin decided that § 5 Abs. 1 UrhG only applies for literary works (Sprachwerke) and not for works of the visual arts (Werke der bildenden Kunst) | ” |
- Stefan2 (talk) 12:30, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- It refers to texts (§ 5 Abs. 1 UrhG) or in the next section to other works published "for the attention of the general public" as a matter of official concern (§ 5 Abs. 2 UrhG). But either way, with no case example at hand it may be impossible to make a qualified decision here. This link [[1]] has a bit more background info. GermanJoe (talk) 14:23, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Stefan2 (talk) 12:30, 19 February 2013 (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 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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:05, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Ssn building.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Unlicensed and without a source. Is this the same image as http://www.panoramio.com/photo/44840720 but edited using some image editor? Stefan2 (talk) 16:11, 18 February 2013 (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: Speedy close, fair-use rationale provided. Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 01:42, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Mindy McCready.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).
- it is in violation of Wikipedia's image use policy. per WP:WATERMARK TucsonDavidU.S.A. 16:39, 18 February 2013 (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. AnomieBOT⚡ 17:13, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I know the copyright of this photo and I could not track down a free one. FotoPhest (talk) 19:04, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- close it uses a fairuse rationale, and the subject is dead, so no new free photo can be created. If you still want to delete this file, take it up with WP:FFD. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 01:25, 19 February 2013 (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.