Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2007 September 10
September 10
[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 Butseriouslyfolks (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Likely copyright violation, image previously uploaded as auto-replaceable fair use (Image:BennyBenassi2006.jpg). Google image search also shows it hosted on a different site. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 05:41, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree; this one and the two below by the same contributor all appear to have been taken from websites; very unlikely to all be his photographs. It looks like this merits reviewing any other uploads by the contributor. Shell babelfish 14:58, 10 September 2007 (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 Butseriouslyfolks (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Likely copyvio. You'd have to be a professional photographer or work in the fashion industry to take this kind of photo and professional photographers don't tend to use Microsoft Windows Photo Gallery to edit their images. See also Image:VladaRoslyakovaWikipedia.jpg. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 05:47, 10 September 2007 (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 Butseriouslyfolks (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
see above ˉˉanetode╦╩ 05:47, 10 September 2007 (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 as I8 by Angusmclellan (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to be a scan from some kind of printmedia - therefore I do not beleve it ist GFDL'ed --C-M ?! 11:49, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- On the image description page, the uploader states "The image has been provided in electronic form by its creator, Mr. Antonis Tzen (a good friend) who took the photograph. It has been published in my own book cited in the article. It can be freely reproduced. I change licencing to GFDL so that there is no confusion." His user page seems to support this. Kept —Preceding unsigned comment added by Quadell (talk • contribs) 00:42, 9 October 2007 (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 Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This appears to be a screenshot as opposed to a user-made photo. Videmus Omnia Talk 14:03, 10 September 2007 (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 Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Cannot find image at given source - appears to be from this event, but there is no indication of free license on any of those photos. Videmus Omnia Talk 14:12, 10 September 2007 (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 Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Appears to be a screenshot as opposed to a user-made image. Videmus Omnia Talk 14:13, 10 September 2007 (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 Butseriouslyfolks (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Apepars to be an WP:SPA using {{PD-self}} to circumvent WP:NFCC#1. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 14:17, 10 September 2007 (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 Butseriouslyfolks (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Image not found at given source, contradictory licensing information. Videmus Omnia Talk 14:19, 10 September 2007 (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 Butseriouslyfolks (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Image not found at given source, contradictory license. Videmus Omnia Talk 14:20, 10 September 2007 (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 Butseriouslyfolks (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Image not found at given source, contradictory license. Videmus Omnia Talk 14:21, 10 September 2007 (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 Butseriouslyfolks (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Image not found at given source, contradictory license. Videmus Omnia Talk 14:21, 10 September 2007 (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 Butseriouslyfolks (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Image not found at given source, contradictory license. Videmus Omnia Talk 14:22, 10 September 2007 (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 Butseriouslyfolks (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Can't find given source, doubtful CC license given uploader's history of copyvio problems. Videmus Omnia Talk 14:33, 10 September 2007 (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 Butseriouslyfolks (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Orphan, possibly unfree. Videmus Omnia Talk 14:39, 10 September 2007 (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 Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Appears to be screenshot as opposed to a user-made image. Uploader has history of copyvio problems. Videmus Omnia Talk 14:45, 10 September 2007 (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 Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot find anything at the source wowturkey.com that indicates this image should be in the public domain. I'm not the best translator, but everything I can find indicates that wowturkey maintains the copyrights or that the original photographer holds the copyright. Shell babelfish 14:56, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
All the pictures of wowturkey belong to the public domain, as it is their purpose to DISTRIBUTE freely images of Turkey and Turkey related topics.
(Turkish) http://wowturkey.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=158251#158251 "FAQ: Can I use pictures of wowTurkey?"
(Turkish) http://wowturkey.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=14278 Quote: "Sitemizdeki fotoğrafların kullanımı - Amacımız doğrultusunda, sitemize koyduğumuz fotoğrafların internete yayılması ve kullanılması çok hoşumuza gidiyor. Ne kadar yayılırsa, karşılık beklemeden yaptığımız bu çalışmalarımız ile o kadar gurur duyuyoruz. Lütfen alın fotoğraflarımızı tepe tepe istediğiniz yerde kullanın!" (Translation: Usage of the images of our site - As is it our purpose, we are very excited by the fact that the pictures that we put on our site are used and spread over the internet. The more will it spread, the more we will be proud of our altruistic work. Please take our pictures and use them as you wish at the extent of your leisure!)
(Turkish) http://wowturkey.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3411 "Why did we create this site?" --Eae1983 (talk) 00:38, 31 January 2008 (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 Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The website only allows reprints of text and audio information [1]; no mention of photographs. Shell babelfish 15:01, 10 September 2007 (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 Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Have reason to doubt uploader is copyright holder, appears to be derived from a television program. Videmus Omnia Talk 15:57, 10 September 2007 (UTC) you have no rights to put this picture if it is copyrighted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.159.219.218 (talk) 17:59, 18 September 2007 (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 Nihonjoe (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Image using copyrighted material from an anime series uploaded under improper licenses; copy of Image:Yumi Fukuzawa.jpg, itself uploaded under an improper license. —TangentCube, Dialogues 17:27, 10 September 2007 (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 as I7 by Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No evidence of GFDL license. Videmus Omnia Talk 17:56, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- A friend of mine took a picture of his toy, and I asked if I could used it under GFDL for the article. He said yes, so I posted it. Mathewignash 20:49, 10 September 2007 (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 Butseriouslyfolks (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A collection of copyrighted logos Rettetast 18:10, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Definitely non-free, and doesn't comply with WP:NFC. Deleted. -- But|seriously|folks 08:11, 25 September 2007 (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 as I6 by Maxim (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No evidence of GFDL Rettetast 18:22, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Non-free only. -- But|seriously|folks 08:07, 25 September 2007 (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 Butseriouslyfolks (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
no evidence of gfdl Rettetast 18:24, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- And not properly used as non-free. -- But|seriously|folks 08:05, 25 September 2007 (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 discussion was: Keep; file is tagged as non-free.-FASTILY (TALK) 21:50, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not GFDL. Badly cropped scan or screenshot, see bottom edge. Copyvio. Lupo 20:41, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Any chance of fair use justification? I tried a while ago to get an authorised pic for unrestricted public domain release from Osho International Foundation, but they refused. The Dutch article has another pic, so has the Hindi one, but I suspect none of them really has a kosher copyright history. However, we'll then be left without any pic at all for this individual. Jayen466 01:21, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- He's dead, so non-free content policy probably allows this image. Still needs a use rationale, though. Kept. -- But|seriously|folks 08:03, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Leave it. Even if it is not a real flag, it is an image worth keeping. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.3.0.1 (talk) 00:39, 29 November 2007 (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.