Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images)
Jump to: navigation, search

Administrator instructions



This page is for listing and discussing files that are marked as available under a free license or public domain, but have disputed source or licensing information. Files are listed here for 7 days before they are processed. Files that are tagged with a non-free template should not be listed here.

To list texts with copyright issues, please use WP:Copyright problems.


Before listing, remember that files which are already marked unfree and used under fair use should not be listed here.

To list a file on this page:

Edit the file page.

Add {{puf|date=30 August 2014}} to the file page.

Create its PUF subsection.

Follow this edit link and list the file using {{subst:puf2|image=File_name.ext|reason=reason}} ~~~~ (remember to exclude the File: prefix).

Give due notice.

Inform the uploader by adding a message to their talk page using {{subst:fdw-puf|File_name.ext}} ~~~~

If the image is in use, also consider adding {{pufc|File_name.ext|date=30 August 2014}} to the caption(s), or adding a notice to the article talk pages. Consider also notifying relevant WikiProjects of the discussion.

Remember to replace "File_name.ext" with the name of the file

Unlike Wikipedia:Files for deletion the primary purpose of this page is to ascertain the source and/or copyright status of a file. Therefore it is not specifically a vote to keep or delete but a forum for the exploration of the copyright status/source of a file and contributions should not be added solely in those terms.

Listings should be processed by an administrator after being listed for 7 days. Files that are accepted following this 7-day period should have {{oldpuffull}} added to the file talk page. If no objection to the file's deletion is raised, or no proof that the file is indeed free is provided, the file may be deleted without further notice after the 7-day period.

Note: Files can be unlisted immediately if they are indisputably in the public domain or verifiably licensed under an indisputably free license (GFDL, CC-BY-SA, etc.—see Wikipedia:File copyright tags for more on these).

Speedy deletion[edit]

Blatant copyright violations or files missing source or license information may be "speedied"

If a file is unquestionably copied from another website and no assertion of permission or fair use is made, the file may be speedy deleted under criterion F9 (formerly I9). Such files do not need to be listed here. Please tag the file with {{subst:db-f9|url=source URL}} and warn the user with {{db-copyvio-notice}}.

If a file is missing source, evidence of permission, or license information, place either use:


on the description page to put the file in the appropriate category. After being tagged for 7 days, the file will be eligible for speedy deletion per criterion 4 or criterion 11 for images/media.

Please also notify the uploader so they get a chance to fix the problem(s). The templates {{subst:File source|File:file name}} and {{image copyright}} are made for this purpose, but feel free to write a message of your own. It is not necessary to warn the uploader about every individual file if they have uploaded several of such files, but at least one message telling them that files without source/license will be deleted should be given to each user.

If a file is indisputably non-free, and its possible use can comply with our non-free content policy, be bold and retag it as a non-free file using a non-free image tag instead of taking it to this page.

Please note that this page is not for disputing the fair use of already non-free media, but for the disputing if a freely licensed file really is free. Please take queries of this nature to Files for deletion or Non-free content review An archiving system was implemented July 2007. For older discussions, see the history pages. For all discussions from July 3, 2007 forward, see the Archive.

Holding cell[edit]

These files have been listed for at least 7 days. Discussions should be closed following the steps here. Files that have been determined to be acceptable may be removed from this page.

New listings[edit]

August 23[edit]

File:Rosario Latouchent RC1.jpg[edit]

File:Rosario Latouchent RC1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • Extremely low resolution and lacks EXIF data, highly unlikely own work as claimed Jackmcbarn (talk) 04:46, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Guru hargobind.jpg[edit]

File:Guru hargobind.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • Invalid license, and there is no evidence that this file is in public domain. eh bien mon prince (talk) 09:56, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

August 24[edit]

File:KJ Screen Shot.jpeg[edit]

File:KJ Screen Shot.jpeg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • Defined as a screen shot. No license or permission to use given. Copyright likely held by TV/ film company. Egghead06 (talk) 14:59, 24 August 2014 (UTC)


File:MelSachsAttorney.jpeg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • It is painfully obvious that this is a screen grab from a television, not a photo that a user took of this person. You can even see the name of either the program or the network in the lower left corner. Further, it is of fairly poor quality, it looks like they just took a picture of their tv screen. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:30, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Ajantrik GB.jpg[edit]

File:Ajantrik GB.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • Image is signed and watermarked. Neither appear to of any relation to the uploader. Eeekster (talk) 18:30, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

File:The Night Runners, From Left to Right, Laz & Richard Mason.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; deleted by RHaworth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT 16:11, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

File:The Night Runners, From Left to Right, Laz & Richard Mason.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
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.

File:Mondrian CompRYB.jpg[edit]

File:Mondrian CompRYB.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • There is no evidence that this is in the public domain in the United States as there is no evidence that it was published before 1923 or that it wasn't published at all until 2003. Stefan2 (talk) 23:09, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

August 25[edit]

File:Illustration of the Capture of Yerba Buena (San Francisco, California), Late 19th century.jpg[edit]

File:Illustration of the Capture of Yerba Buena (San Francisco, California), Late 19th century.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • Historical drawing, quite likely PD-old, but impossible to ascertain without proper source documentation (and also worthless to the encyclopedia without documentation of provenance). Fut.Perf. 06:53, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

File:8 the play.jpg[edit]

File:8 the play.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

August 26[edit]

File:Wayne Sharpe Image.jpg[edit]

File:Wayne Sharpe Image.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • EXIF: "(C)2009 Seeker, all rights reserved, 2009 Seeker Photography" Eeekster (talk) 07:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

File:FángXiù.png and File:KàngXiù.png[edit]

File:FángXiù.png (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • This is a software screenshot, no source given, licensed with PD-Self which is unlikely. Deadstar (talk) 13:29, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Night with quotation template.jpg[edit]

File:Night with quotation template.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:Night on WikiWand.jpg[edit]

File:Night on WikiWand.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).


File:I5719-2005Mar03L.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • doesn't have a notice "no rights reserved" that I can find. It could well be that a PD-US-Army applies, but there is no information when or in what context the image was taken. Deadstar (talk) 15:42, 26 August 2014 (UTC)


File:Iakbay.gif (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • This image is likely a photo-of-a-photo or a scan of an old photo depicting Wernher von Braun and Ismael Akbay. Source is "Space Camp Turkey Exhibit 6/12/2000" but was certainly taken well before 2000, and not by uploader who released it with a free "selfmade" license. Deadstar (talk) 15:50, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

August 27[edit]

File:Icelandic police star (logo).jpg[edit]

File:Icelandic police star (logo).jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • Licensing rationale given is "official item legally exempt from copyright in its country of origin"."International aspects", however, says that "a work that is not copyrightable in one country (even if that country is its country of origin) can still be copyrighted in other countries". The file appears to have been downloaded from somewhere (perhaps an official website) and then uploaded to Wikipedia by the uploader, but no link (source page, etc.) is provided so that its public domain status can be verified. Just requesting clarification of its copyright status. Marchjuly (talk) 01:36, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
Don't know the source but the police star was published in the Icelandic Law Gazette, regulation 1151/2011 (there's a better version of the image in the PDF). Cannot determine if the exact source is from there although it does seem that the image in question is a lower quality version. Regulations are specifically exempted from copyright in Iceland (Article 9 of the Copyright Act). This may or may not provide an answer regarding the international aspect. -Svavar Kjarrval (talk) 18:00, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
Does article 9 of the Icelandic copyright act apply to images in acts? In many countries, such exemptions only apply to the text of the act but not to any included images. The wording at c:COM:CRT#Iceland suggests that the exemption only might apply to text. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:50, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
The question if Article 9 applies to images has not been answered in court nor via any administrative decisions, as far as I know, so there's nothing definiate. Note that Article 9 does not specifically refer to text. I would think that any image which holds any significance at all to the content, even in the smallest degree, of any work in which Article 9 applies to, would too be exempted. At least according to the spirit of the Article. The text of the regulation even specifically refers to the image. If this interpretation would hold up in court, I cannot be sure. If we are still unsure, I can ask the ministry for their view regarding images. -Svavar Kjarrval (talk) 22:26, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Silly questions perhaps so please bear with me. Is Article 9 only in Icelandic? Does the Icelandic Government provide official translations of its Acts in English? Is ":c:COM:CRT#Iceland" a user translation or an official translation? While it is true that neither "text" nor "image" appear in "Acts, regulations, administrative provisions, court rulings and similar official documents, as well as official translation of such documents, are not copyrighted", it seems to me that "written content" is what is being discussed. Isn't an act, regulation, etc. essentially an official representation of some content in written form? An official document may or may not include an image, but it has to have text because no text means no document, right? Therefore, the word "text" does not need to be specifically mentioned at all. An "image", on the other hand, is not something that an official document absolutely needs to exist. If images were also intended to be covered under Article 9, then it seems necessary to explicitly state such a thing in order to avoid any ambiguity, right? I am not claiming to be an expert on copyrights, but that's just how it seems to me. - Marchjuly (talk) 01:25, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Icelandic law is written in Icelandic. If there is any discrepancy between the original Icelandic text and a translation of it, then the original Icelandic text takes precedence. However, in Nordic law, presumably including Icelandic law, the main thing is not how the law is formulated but what the lawmaker intended. Therefore, it is often necessary to read other background documents such as propositions to the parliament in order to tell what the law is supposed to mean. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:00, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification Stefan2. - Marchjuly (talk) 21:28, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Article 9 states: "Laws, regulations, government orders, court rulings and other similar documents, that are not made by the public, are not protected by this act, nor the official translation of such data." (Icelandic: Lög, reglugerðir, fyrirmæli stjórnvalda, dómar og önnur áþekk gögn, sem gerð eru af opinberri hálfu, njóta ekki verndar eftir lögum þessum, og ekki heldur opinberar þýðingar á slíkum gögnum.) User translation. No official translations. It's not copyrighted. Argument invalid. Hopper1010 (talk) 13:45, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the additional information Hopper1010. Does "not copyrighted" mean under Icelandic law, in other countries, or both? If it can be copyrighted in other countries, even if it's not copyrighted in Iceland, then it I think it might not be acceptable for use on Wikipedia as public domain per "Wikipedia: Public Domain-International aspects". Just trying to clarify this. Marchjuly (talk) 21:35, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
This is not an official translation. The ministry has published a translation into English and Article 9 is translated as: "Acts, Regulations, administrative provisions, court rulings and similar official documents are not subject to copyright according to this Act, nor are official translations of such documents."
Asked the ministry for their view and they were not ready to specifically answer the question regarding the copyright status of images within material which otherwise falls under Article 9 except to refer to a Bill which later became law. The Bill was an implementation of an EU Directive 2003/98 regarding re-use of government data. Said Bill says that if an employee produces work which obviously will be published, the copyright goes to the agency (except the moral rights). Regarding the International perspective, the rights to use such images should then be roughly the same as within the EU. -Svavar Kjarrval (talk) 12:04, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
Icelandic law only applies to Iceland and is null and void outside Iceland. It is unclear how countries interpret such statements about government works in the laws of other countries. Commons typically accepts files which are exempt from copyright in the source country under such reasons, but it is as far as I can tell untested if this is correct. There is a statement somewhere on a U.S. government website which states that {{PD-USGov}} doesn't necessarily apply outside the United States. I think that this statement was added there because someone in Japan found that it was unclear if {{PD-USGov}} was valid in Japan and therefore asked the U.S. government for permission to use some material.
Under Article 5 (2) of the Berne Convention, you may not take into account the laws of other countries, unless an exception is listed in the Berne Convention itself. One such example is the rule of the shorter term, which states that countries no longer have to protect works if the work is in the public domain through expiry of a term in the source country. It is unclear if works which are in the public domain in Iceland for this reason are in the public domain through expiry of a term or for a different reason. I'm only aware of one court ruling about the interpretation of the words "through expiry of a term": the French supreme court ruled that works which are {{PD-US-not renewed}} aren't in the public domain in the United States through expiry of a term but for a different reason, and all such works had their copyright restored in France when the United States joined the Berne Convention in 1989, unless a different reason such as {{PD-1923}}, {{PD-old-70}} or {{Anonymous-EU}} applied. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:07, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

In Wikipedia: Public Domain-International aspect, the example provided in there suggests that it refers to public made (i.e. made by the member of the public), however, it isn't made by a member of the public, made by the government, it CANNOT be copyrighted. Hopper1010 (talk) 13:54, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

File:ParishP P1010001.JPG[edit]

File:ParishP P1010001.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • Photo of text published 1975; no reason to believe it's PD. moogsi(blah) 01:44, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Kapil Dev Pledges.jpg[edit]

File:Kapil Dev Pledges.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:PH 1998 Rose Parade Float.jpg[edit]

File:PH 1998 Rose Parade Float.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • Non-free parade decorations. Stefan2 (talk) 15:30, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
  • View - Reasoning ... -- Wapacman (talk) 21:17, 27 August 2014 (UTC)I own the photo. This image will not show up anywhere online because I own the photograph, unless nominator for deletion can prove that this image belongs to another person, then the image should not be deleted. What is the evidence that this image was taken by someone else?
  • Keep - This is a float in a public space, the image was taken by the photographer. Not a copyvio and not a derivative work. Carrite (talk) 03:02, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
    • There is no evidence that the uploader created the decorations. You can't take photographs of items in a public space unless the items either are buildings or are in the public domain. This is not the case here. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:09, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Aaron Tveit suit.png[edit]

File:Aaron Tveit suit.png (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • Image quality suggests a screen capture. Eeekster (talk) 19:28, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Shop 'Til You Drop logo Pat Finn Era.jpg[edit]

File:Shop 'Til You Drop logo Pat Finn Era.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • At best a derivative work. Eeekster (talk) 20:40, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

August 28[edit]


File:Dickies-Vinyl.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • I seek a ruling on this image, User:Stefan2 claims it to be a derivative work; I contend there is no copyvio here. Carrite (talk) 03:10, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Stefan2 - ping. Carrite (talk) 03:11, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Can you explain why you believe that you are not violating the copyrights? -- Asclepias (talk) 15:19, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete The uploader refuses to provide any copyright tag for the items shown on the photograph. Without any information about their copyright status, they should be assumed to be non-free. --Stefan2 (talk) 13:23, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
What "items" are you speaking about? 7-inch slabs of colored vinyl are not copyrighted, the sound content on them is copyrighted... What exactly is your objection here? Carrite (talk) 05:46, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete - no doubt it is a derivative work. Eeekster (talk) 23:07, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Derivative of what? Carrite (talk) 05:46, 30 August 2014 (UTC)


File:Lipstick-catepillar.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • Image of public sculpture in a country without Freedom of Panorama.
    This file has been debated at PUF before (in April 2013) and I believe it was closed incorrectly. In my opinion this image should be classified as Fair Use. Given the consensus recently reached to tag an image of a different sculpture by the same artist as Fair Use, and the fact that the artist's lawyers have previously used DMCA takedown notices on other images (here), I think the burden of proof was incorrectly applied in the previous PUF discussion. The sculptor (Oldenburg) has a long history of claiming copyright in his (very famous) works and maintains a current website listing all his sculptures with large copyright notices on each page. I believe it is very reasonably to assume the artist proactively claimed copyright at the time of the work's creation and it is clear that he still does. Wittylama 14:10, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
  • I agree that without crystal clear evidence that this work was ever published without copyright notice that we should take the conservative route and assume non-free. --MASEM (t) 15:12, 28 August 2014 (UTC)


File:2-Duarte-Honor-Boricua.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • "Modern artwork (mural), no FOP in the US." Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:54, 28 August 2014 (UTC)


File:Washingtonpalms.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • "This image is web-sized, and has no EXIF data. User has uploaded many images, 99% of which have EXIF data, and most of which are "normal" sized. I suspect this is not self made. Deadstar (talk) 13:55, 19 August 2014 (UTC)" Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:55, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

File:2nd Marquis of Lema.jpg[edit]

File:2nd Marquis of Lema.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • "No source, no painter mentioned, way to know if PD-Art applies. Subject died in 1945. Deadstar (talk) 14:07, 25 August 2014 (UTC)" Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:55, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Bayern Munich Quadruple Title.jpg[edit]

File:Bayern Munich Quadruple Title.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • Trophy designs require a seperate status confirmation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:07, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Larry Itliong Village.jpg[edit]

File:Larry Itliong Village.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • When's the building dated? This is an architectural facade, and shoul ideally be credited as well. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:24, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

The building was dedicated this year, around February. Why delete the photo, when the intent of the photograph is to promote Hi-Fi as a destination, and I took the photo myself? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wapacman (talkcontribs) 18:14, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Architectural works are subject to copyright in the US see:Commons: Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#United_States, although as you say this is your own photo, Withdrawn as {{FoP-US}}, It would be reasonable to credit the Architect/Designer if known though. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:20, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Unidad Park.jpg[edit]

File:Unidad Park.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • 2 queries, This image contains architectural elements but not indication of their date. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:27, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

What does "Not indication of their date" mean? It was taken just a couple of weeks ago. Unidad Park was dedicated in 2007, and the mural 1995. Do I have to include all the information with this photograph I took? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wapacman (talkcontribs) 18:20, 28 August 2014 (UTC)


File:Madness-guy-sebastian.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • This is an album cover. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:32, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Tnr cover painting 144.jpg[edit]

File:Tnr cover painting 144.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • This is an album cover. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:35, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Wake up dead cover.jpg[edit]

File:Wake up dead cover.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • This is an album cover. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:36, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Headshots europe cover art.jpg[edit]

File:Headshots europe cover art.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • This is looks like album coverat? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:39, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Flair Embraer.jpeg[edit]

File:Flair Embraer.jpeg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • EXIT indicates: "Copyright holder Shawn Talbot Photography" Eeekster (talk) 22:55, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Azadi pool under construction.png[edit]

File:Azadi pool under construction.png (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • Appears to be scanned from a printed source. Eeekster (talk) 23:05, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

August 29[edit]


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

File:Pushan wifi.jpg[edit]

File:Pushan wifi.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • Captured from a video. Eeekster (talk) 20:03, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Pushan wiki7.jpg[edit]

File:Pushan wiki7.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • Captured from a video. Eeekster (talk) 20:04, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Pushan wiki2.jpg[edit]

File:Pushan wiki2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:Pushan wiki3.jpg[edit]

File:Pushan wiki3.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:Pushan wiki4.jpg[edit]

File:Pushan wiki4.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:Pushan wiki5.jpg[edit]

File:Pushan wiki5.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:Pushan wiki6.jpg[edit]

File:Pushan wiki6.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

August 30[edit]


Today is August 30 2014. Put new nominations in Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2014 August 30 -- (new nomination)

If the current date's page has been started without the header, apply {{subst:puf log}} to the top of the day's page.

Please ensure "===August 30===" is at the very top of the new page so that internal page links from the main Possibly unfree files page (the one you're on now) work.