Jump to content

Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2006 August 4

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< August 3 August 5 >

August 4[edit]

Uploaded by Mr.Do! (notify | contribs). It was uploaded by a vandalism-only account and its only purpose is for vandalism of the page Suicide. Quentin Smith 13:26, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Banzai! (notify | contribs). UE and this is an once deleted and re-uploaded image that has "My friend Clare K." cited as a source. "My friend Clare K." is not a source that can be verified as having released the original image this cropped version is based upon into the public domain. This image was previously a candidate for speedy deletion due to being unsourced and recreated. (→Netscott) 07:57, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify, I removed the speedy deletion tag due to potential misuse — Netscott and Banzai were in a lengthy edit war over licensing for this, and I'm not comfortable speedy deleting an image marked by any edit war participant. I also don't necessarily agree with Netscott's open and shut assessment of the image's failure to establish a valid license as he didn't provide reason to doubt the reasons given by Banzai (nor do I disagree - I don't intend to take any stance at all). In any case, my concern is not over the license itself, but rather ensuring that process is followed in a dispute; I defer judgment over the validity of Banzai's claim to the reviewing admin. Tijuana Brass¡Épa! 07:52, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Additional clarification... this image is sooner unencyclopedic and User:Tijuana Brass's own removal of it from the Mel Gibson article seems to support this view. (→Netscott) 07:57, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's right. I should have made it clearer that I don't intend to take a stance on the license issue; when it comes to encyclopedic usefulness, I don't think it belongs. Tijuana Brass¡Épa! 08:02, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's not such a good picture as to make the fight worthwhile. Nuke it. Just zis Guy you know? 08:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by JayKeaton (notify | contribs). OR, WP is not free webhosting. The uploader's summary could be interpreted as placing restrictions on use and this image may not be considered "free". BigDT 00:17, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Imarobot (notify | contribs). OR, UE BigDT 00:21, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Imarobot (notify | contribs). OR, unbelievably unencyclopedic BigDT 00:22, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Mister_macphisto (notify | contribs). AU, Presumably a derivative of a copyrighted image BigDT 00:26, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Smk5048 (notify | contribs). Fair use TV screenshot used to illustrate the subject of the screenshot, rather than the TV show BigDT 00:28, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Phnx2ashes (notify | contribs). UE, OR, WP is not free webhosting BigDT 00:32, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Gazder_jehaan (notify | contribs). OR, UE BigDT 00:47, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by RealestNigga (notify | contribs). CV You still can read "Photo by Arnauld Tuner / Wired" on the bottom side. Image was wrongly tagged as a music video screenshot.- Abu Badali 04:30, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Being found by yahoo image search does not make a picture free. surely copyvio. --Rtc 04:45, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploader not notified. Relisting this. howcheng {chat} 16:48, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is not your work, so plase do not try to claim it as such, Humus sapiens: User:Synthe uploaded the original. I've deleted the link so this is not deleted inadvertently. Brianski 05:01, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Gafaddict (notify | contribs). States fair-use promo but source is YTMND, a probable copyvio of [1] which may in turn be a copyvio of [2] - in other words, we have no idea of its actual provenance. Format suggests an album cover, but not certain. Anyway, "found it on the internets" is not a good source. Just zis Guy you know? 08:26, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Tn84 (notify | contribs). CV from [3] BigDT 11:48, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by BreakThePhobia87 (notify | contribs). OR, AU, poor quality BigDT 12:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by BreakThePhobia87 (notify | contribs). OR, presumably uploaded for the A7 speedy deleted Highbyrd [4]. BigDT 12:06, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Rama (notify | contribs). OR, and somehow I don't think thi work is "free software". BigDT 12:09, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Fluence (notify | contribs). Tiny fair use image of a car. It's UE and it's used on userboxes (not permitted for FU images). BigDT 12:11, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Rama (notify | contribs). OR, Tagged as "free software". BigDT 12:13, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Snob (notify | contribs). OR, UE BigDT 13:22, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by GJRFMorelligu (notify | contribs). Exceeds the acceptable length for a fair use sound sample as described at Wikipedia:Sound samples Rossrs 14:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by GJRFMorelligu (notify | contribs). Exceeds the acceptable length for a fair use sound sample as described at Wikipedia:Sound samples Rossrs 14:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by GJRFMorelligu (notify | contribs). Exceeds the acceptable length for a fair use sound sample as described at Wikipedia:Sound samples Rossrs 14:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Pauliomcbride (notify | contribs). CV per [5] --Arnzy (whats up?) 23:19, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Striver (notify | contribs). Image of boy on a jeep being used to illustrate an article on Israeli human shields. It serves a purpose of decoration rather than identification. Unless the photo itself is iconic, this image is not fair use. We cannot use a photo of a particular incident to illustrate a concept. For example, a photo of a Star Trek DVD can be used to illustrate an article about the movie for purposes of identification, but cannot be used to illustrate DVDs in general. A link to the site where this image is from would serve the same purpose as including the image. This is not a referendum on Israel - just on whether a particular image qualifies for fair use. BigDT 18:10, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • keepThe photo is "iconic", it has been used in multiple places to illustrate this specific event [6] [7] [8]. Event is of historical notice and will not re-occure. Just as valid as any of the pictures in 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict, Targeting of civilian areas in the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict or any other military conflict picture.--Striver 18:18, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • You may not want to stick with that argument. If this image is just as legitimate as those in the other two articles ... well ... basically everything in Targeting of civilian areas in the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict has been deleted or will be. As of right now, I count eight deleted images. This one is going to be deleted the second anyone on Commons points it out to them - Commons does not allow Fair use images - although it would obviously be permitted here. This one is going to be deleted as an invalid fair use image. (If someone provides a source so it can survive a speedy, it will die here.) This one just comes from a gallery of copyvio images - that's not even a real source. So yes, it needs to be deleted as well. In 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict, Image:Israeli soldiers mourn during a funeral.jpg obviously needs to go for the same reason - its source is just a gallery of copyvio images and thus there is no way to know if it is fair use. The rest are either free images, or, in the case of the IDF image, ones for which fair use is not really disputable. BigDT 19:10, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • If you look again, they are back, since they are fair use. So is this. Its simply a photo that will no re-occure and it represents a notable historical event that can not be reproduced. --Striver 15:16, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • While that's very interesting, press photos cannot be used as "fair use" images. If they could, then AP and Reuters would go out of business as anyone could steal their images and call it "fair use". BigDT 18:40, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
          • I dont agree, see "Image:The Falling Man.jpg".
            • Again, the photo itself is notable and the subject of discussion apart from the general topic. But in this case, you aren't writing an article about the photo, you're using the photo to illustrate the subject of the photo. BigDT 01:54, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Image:The Falling Man.jpg" is not on the Falling men from the wtc article, its on the 9/11 attacks article. On the other hand, this article will be about this very specific topic, IDF use of Human shields. So i really do not see how your arguement is valid. --Striver 17:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're wrong. Image:The Falling Man.jpg is being used in The Falling Man, an article devoted specifically to this image. howcheng {chat} 17:07, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Striver (notify | contribs). Reuters image, invalid example of fair use under WP:FAIR#Counterexamples #5. Please also see my above nomination. Again, this is not about Israel - it's about an image. BigDT 18:12, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Tstrobaugh (notify | contribs). Copyrighted logo used only on a UBX BigDT 19:20, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It is now being used in the wiki article International Society for Philosophical Enquiry -- Avi 19:51, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Very well. I withdraw my nomination for deletion. It does, however, need to be removed from the offending userbox. BigDT 20:00, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
... which I have now done. BigDT 20:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not deleted. howcheng {chat} 17:15, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Mex209 (notify | contribs). OR, UE, probably someone's logo BigDT 22:24, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Keycard (notify | contribs). OR, description page gives insufficient context to determine encyclopedic use BigDT 22:29, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Was linked to from the article mascot; I'll investigate and see why it was delinked.--Keycard (talk) 08:08, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • It is now readded, so do not delete. It was removed here, without good reason.--Keycard (talk) 08:11, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • I tend to agree with User:210.84.42.164, but at any rate, it's a content dispute, not a question for IFD. Thus, I withdraw my nomination. BigDT 19:34, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not deleted. howcheng {chat} 17:20, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Quadell (notify | contribs). OR,UE The image is supposed to represent part of the Nanking Massacres. However the website source gives no information on origin or source. Thus I cannot see how this is a picture that can be justifiably used for anything relating to the Nanking deaths. John Smith's 22:38, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have also been informed that the PD China tags only cover images that have been published for more than 50 years, not that they are released into the public domain 50 years after they were taken. There is no evidence as to when the picture was first published by the author, so the copyright may also be a problem. John Smith's 18:21, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
ISBN 0963223151. And BTW, the book has a promotional website, and look what it has on its index page! -- Миборовский 02:46, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I still don't see anything on that website to justify the original source. John Smith's 06:51, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Caiqian (notify | contribs). OR,UE The image is supposed to represent part of the Nanking Massacres. However the website source gives no information on origin or source. Thus I cannot see how this is a picture that can be justifiably used for anything relating to the Nanking deaths. John Smith's 22:38, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have also been informed that the PD China tags only cover images that have been published for more than 50 years, not that they are released into the public domain 50 years after they were taken. There is no evidence as to when the picture was first published by the author, so the copyright may also be a problem. John Smith's 18:21, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
ISBN 0963223151. Another one? -- Миборовский 02:46, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What does the book list as the original source? John Smith's 06:51, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Quadell (notify | contribs). OR,UE The image is supposed to represent part of the Nanking Massacres. However the website source gives no information on origin or source. Thus I cannot see how this is a picture that can be justifiably used for anything relating to the Nanking deaths. John Smith's 22:38, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have also been informed that the PD China tags only cover images that have been published for more than 50 years, not that they are released into the public domain 50 years after they were taken. There is no evidence as to when the picture was first published by the author, so the copyright may also be a problem. John Smith's 18:21, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
ISBN 0963223151. You're on a roll here, aren't you? -- Миборовский 02:46, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What's the original source? John Smith's 06:51, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Bhudiya2 (notify | contribs). OR, insufficient context to determine use, description says "Free to use for the Swaminarayan Sampraday". I don't know what that is, but it implies a condition for use, which keeps this from being a free image. BigDT 23:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Quadell (notify | contribs). OR,UE The image is supposed to represent part of the Nanking Massacres. However the website source gives no information on origin or source. Thus I cannot see how this is a picture that can be justifiably used for anything relating to the Nanking deaths. John Smith's 23:31, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have also been informed that the PD China tags only cover images that have been published for more than 50 years, not that they are released into the public domain 50 years after they were taken. There is no evidence as to when the picture was first published by the author, so the copyright may also be a problem. John Smith's 18:21, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
ISBN 0963223151. On an unholy crusade, are you? -- Миборовский 02:46, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What's the original source? Then refer/report me. Making cheap jibes makes you seem like a coward. John Smith's 06:51, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Astuishin (notify | contribs). Image from a website, no evidence that the copyright holder has released all rights. BigDT 23:33, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Astuishin (notify | contribs). Tagged with PD-US. But according to the copyright notice on the source website [9], "The owners of this data strictly prohibit redistribution, retransmission, or resale of data without express written permission by the owner of the data." BigDT 23:41, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Jay Gatsby (notify | contribs). Logo-cyberboard.gif obsoleted by Logo-cyberboard.png Jay Gatsby(talk) 00:29, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2006_August_4&oldid=1138513600"