Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 September 20

< September 19	September 21 >

September 20

File:Swfcfire.jpg

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Rettetast (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:46, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Two identical images found through TinEye: [1]. Jackl 05:05, 20 September 2009 (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.

Files by Dvtouch

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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: All images deleted. Thanks for reporting. Rettetast (talk) 10:10, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All files uploaded by Dvtouch (talk · contribs) with an image size of 500px are blatant copyright violations, all images stolen from Flickr, see his talkpage User talk:Dvtouch for examples. It is not necessary - and of course not demandable - to do that much work and search all the files. 500px at the longer side is a clear indication that an image comes from Flickr or Panoramio as this are the default webresolution there. See the list below for the blatant ones, most images are related to the scope Cambodia:

Besides, from my expirience on Commons, I would delete all other files by that uploader. If someone tokes the internet as a self-service shop it not makes sence that he suddenly uploads own works. This goes to:

File:French colonial architecture phnom penh.PNG
File:Sisowath quay phnom penh.jpg (Canon EOS 20D)
File:Phnom penh waterfront.jpg
File:Phnom penh skyline at sunset.jpg (Kodak)
File:National assembly phnom penh.jpg
File:Chan chaya pavilion royal palace phnom penh.jpg (Nikon D70)
File:Martin stadium apple cup 2006.JPG
File:Martin stadium.jpg TinEye gives the possible reference to the user University homepage, but maybe that's a false positive.

The collages consisting of non-free images are already marked as missing sources. The Logos can be switched to fair use. File:Wsu apple cup fans.JPG appears to be a private photo. --Martin H. (talk) 10:30, 20 September 2009 (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:Iglesiasenrique.jpg

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:19, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly a scan of another image. I doubt the uploader owns the rights to the original, posed, photograph. J Milburn (talk) 12:10, 20 September 2009 (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:Carternickstmh.png

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:19, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious screenshot of copyrighted video —SpaceFlight89 12:29, 20 September 2009 (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:Snapvlcplayer.png

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:19, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Screenshot, likely non-free. —SpaceFlight89 12:31, 20 September 2009 (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:Nadina Coyle - Sep 09.jpg

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Rettetast (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:46, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be a photograph of a big screen or something akin, making this a derivative work. J Milburn (talk) 13:52, 20 September 2009 (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:Coleman68.jpg

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Rettetast (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:46, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stated to be GFDL, but the source provided is just the Columbia University Wiki. It's not clear that the uploader there own the copyright to the image, and there is no information on their image page about the author/source. Sherool (talk) 14:09, 20 September 2009 (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:Sarah Harding - Sep 09.jpg

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Rettetast (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:46, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image of a big screen. Non-free derivative work. J Milburn (talk) 14:11, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Admin Yann on Commons notes that there is no author in a screen shot. See this The process is all automated unlike someone who takes a picture from a camera. If there is no original author, this cannot be a derivative image. So, I would say keep. --Leoboudv (talk) 01:22, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Sounds like you a backwards claim. Taking a screen shot takes no effort so the person taking the screen shot cannot claim any artistic input so it isn't even a derivative. i.e. the copyright ownership still lays 100% with the original copyright holder. Claiming that the process of taking the original video shot takes no creative input is likely false. By claiming that screen shot can't be a copyright violation which is effectively what you are doing would be fantastic news for the pirate bay and it's ilk; I can individually screen shot (in an automated fashion) every frame of a film, string them together and no violation occurs, that is of course absolute bollocks.

As a different example all that money paid for broadcast rights to major sporting events, complete waste of money, since the videoing is purely an automated process, hence in this view no copyright, so any other broadcaster would be free to just ontransmit it.

To summarise that, taking a screen shot maynot produce a derivative, in that case what it produces is a verbatim copy of the original, it hasn't magically wiped out copyright ownership of the original. i.e. it's a straight copyvio --82.7.40.7 (talk) 06:27, 2 October 2009 (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:Unisinosjpg.jpg

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:19, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Low resolution arial shot. I suspect this image has been taken from elsewhere. J Milburn (talk) 14:15, 20 September 2009 (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:Nokia_N900_Portrait_Mode.jpg

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:19, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be a Nokia promotional image. Closedmouth (talk) 15:47, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is. The photo has been replaced by the same one taken from the Nokia Corporation website. Please delete this one. --Mandor (talk) 04:01, 21 September 2009 (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:Mark-Whitacre-2008.jpg

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Rettetast (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:46, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note also the watermark, Send2Press Newswire, that was cleverly removed from this version of the image used. Cirt (talk) 17:15, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We've been through this before. The website it was retrieved from ([2]) is CC 3.0 - it's listed at the bottom of the page. Fleetflame · whack! whack! · 19:56, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The license on that page is very unclear, since it refers to the text and says nothing of the images. Even if we assume that it is intended the licensing covers the image also, the CC licensing listed is "This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 Unported License.". This is problematic since it (a) doesn't match the license which has been put against the files page and (b) the noncommercial part means wikipedia doesn't recognise it as a free license for it's purposes. --82.7.40.7 (talk) 11:36, 26 September 2009 (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.

Official People's Republic of China photos

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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.

Deleted - same issue recently cropped up for images from the Philipines. Though some of them could be justified with fair-use rationales it seems better to scrub them as having incorrect licences and start from scratch - Peripitus (Talk) 12:22, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Li Keqiang.jpg
File:Chairman Hu Jintao.jpg
File:Hua Guofeng.jpg
File:Qiao Shi.jpg
File:Jia Qinglin.jpg
File:Li Ruihuan.jpg
File:Deng Yingchao.jpg
File:Huang Ju.jpg
File:陈云.gif
File:Lin Biao.gif
File:Yao Yilin.jpg
File:Wan Li.jpg
File:Li Lanqing.jpg
File:Zeng Qinghong.jpg
File:Zhu De.gif
File:Yang Shangkun.jpg
File:Jiang Zemin.jpg
File:Deng Xiaoping.jpg
File:Li Peng official photo .jpg
File:Wen Jiabao portrait.jpg
File:President Hu Jintao.jpg
File:Wu Yi official.jpg (This one was already listed on Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 September_13#File:Wu Yi official.jpg by 221.127.248.116 for the same reason, but I decided to include it in this set instead).

All uploaded by ASDFGH (talk · contribs), there may be a few more of the same class that I've missed but think this is most of them. These are all "tagged" with just raw Wikicode copy & pasted from Commons:Template:PD-PRC-exempt, with an additional statement added below claiming that official photos of public figures are exempt from copyright by Chinese law. However I can find no mention of official photos in the linked version of the law, and the template also does not mention official photos, just law texts, legal and official documents, mere facts and so forth. Also the source websites generally all say "All rights reserved" for what it's worth. A few of these may be PD due to age, but pretty sure the current "tagging" is not correct. --Sherool (talk) 18:15, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Portraits of PRC politicians with PD-PRC-exempt and some older request like commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Hu Jintao Portrait.JPG. In many/most countries government works with administrative nature are public domain to not hamper legal relations with copyright restrictions. It is not possible to use a law if the text of the law is protected by copyright, the public interest beats any of the authors copyright or economic interests. Portrait photographs or any other photographic works missing this administrative nature, they are not of public interest (in its meaning!) and not public domain. There is nothing documented for PRC copyright on Commons/Wikipedia or the law that argues different. --Martin H. (talk) 19:17, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The following photos are standard-issue Xinhua news release. Copyright is not an issue in China for such pictures when used in an information or new context. DOR (HK) (talk) 06:56, 21 September 2009 (UTC) Category:Chinese public domain photographs[reply]

Any sources to back that up? All the pages I checked contain notices such as "Copyright©2008 www.gov.cn All Rights Reserved", "Copyright © Ministry of National Defense of the People's Republic of China. All Rights Reserved" and so forth. On what basis do you say that copyright is not an issue? The category you mention above is for images who's copyright have expired due to age. A few of the ones listed below may qualify for this, but a lot of them are less than 50 years old and do not qualify. --Sherool (talk) 13:48, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

photo from Xinhua is copyrighted, [3] "凡本网注明“来源：新华网”的所有作品，版权均属于新华社，未经本网授权不得转载、摘编或利用其它方式使用上述作品。已经本网授权使用作品的，应在授权范围内使用，并注明"来源：新华网"。违反上述声明者，本网将追究其相关法律责任。"--221.127.140.108 (talk) 16:19, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:Realistically, there probably isn't much of a problem with copyright, but the tags may need to be changed. Perhaps some of these pictures can be tagged with "non-free-use in the absence of a suitable alternative" tags. Colipon+(Talk) 13:50, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well yeah, at least in the case of diseased people, if you want to write non-free use rationales for the main bio article on some of these be my guest, however note that a lot of the current use in lists and galleries of past office holders would not be acceptable under the non-free use policy and will have to go, so we can't just tag them all as non-free and call it a day either. --Sherool (talk) 14:17, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to continue using the images if we just sourced Xinhua or gov.cn? Colipon+(Talk) 16:29, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean? The images already have sources and we seem to have established that images from Xinhua and gov.cn are not public domain or free licensed by default. Unless someone can demonstrate that the copyright to any of these images have expired due to age the only other way to keep using (some of) them would be if someone produced a convincing rationale for how each use any of the images satisfy all 10 of the Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria (meaning as a minimum the use in list articles probably have to go). --Sherool (talk) 18:18, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikisource.org has a page about Chinese copyright law.[4] I'm not sure how reliable Wikisource is. It sounds like a pretty shady organization to me. --JHP (talk) 17:31, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Second batch of images tagged {{PD-ROC-exempt}}

These are pretty much the same as the ones above, except for Taiwan (Republic of China) instead of mainland China (People's Republic of China). The relevant laws while not identical seem to amount to pretty much the same (official documents, not photos can be PD). --Sherool (talk) 20:02, 20 September 2009 (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:Sachein.jpg

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:52, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Likely image is non-free —SpaceFlight89 18:19, 20 September 2009 (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:Vettaikkaran New Poster.jpg

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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: deleted as an unambiguous copyright violation, published previously at e.g. [5]. Amalthea 21:19, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most likely a non-free image —SpaceFlight89 18:22, 20 September 2009 (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:Club l.jpg

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:52, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be a derivative of the image at the bottom of this page having been put through some image filters. Image is also exactly the same size (not a standard screen resolution) as the pointed to image. 82.7.40.7 (talk) 18:25, 20 September 2009 (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:Mace paulchen2.jpg

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:52, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be a derivative of the image on this page having been put through some image filters. Image even has the same filename. Image is also exactly the same size (not a standard screen resolution) as the pointed to image. 82.7.40.7 (talk) 18:27, 20 September 2009 (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:-model-baxe.jpg

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:19, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be a derivative of the image on this page having been put through some image filters}} 82.7.40.7 (talk) 18:33, 20 September 2009 (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:Nicksnap.png

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:19, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Judging from this uploader's history, the image is almost certainly grabbed from a random website and not his to release. Stifle (talk) 19:16, 20 September 2009 (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:Snapstm.png

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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: Keep; deleted by suckmehballz (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:50, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Judging from this uploader's history, the image is almost certainly grabbed from a random website and not his to release. Stifle (talk) 19:16, 20 September 2009 (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:Snapstmh.png

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:19, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Judging from this uploader's history, the image is almost certainly grabbed from a random website and not his to release. Stifle (talk) 19:16, 20 September 2009 (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:Blades08keyur.jpg

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:19, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Judging from this uploader's history, the image is almost certainly grabbed from a random website and not his to release. Stifle (talk) 19:17, 20 September 2009 (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:Mcleanbsb.jpg

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:19, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Judging from this uploader's history, the image is almost certainly grabbed from a random website and not his to release. Stifle (talk) 19:17, 20 September 2009 (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:Keyursnapshot.png

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:19, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Judging from this uploader's history, the image is almost certainly grabbed from a random website and not his to release. Stifle (talk) 19:18, 20 September 2009 (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:Taara.jpg

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Rettetast (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:46, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Judging from this uploader's history, the image is almost certainly grabbed from a random website and not his to release. Stifle (talk) 19:18, 20 September 2009 (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:BLADES 2009.jpg

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:19, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Judging from this uploader's history, the image is almost certainly grabbed from a random website and not his to release. Stifle (talk) 19:18, 20 September 2009 (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:Babtul.jpg

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Rettetast (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:46, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

per the transcluded page, image is circa 1969 Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:32, 20 September 2009 (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:Betty Balfour.jpg

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:52, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

not clear this is pre-1923, or it was published without a copyright notice. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:49, 20 September 2009 (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:Inselian.jpg

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 under fair use. — ξ ^xplicit 06:02, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Photo is copyrighted to Associated Press. It is not a historic image - I know of no histories of the twentieth century that make mention of Elian Gonzalez. It was a newsworthy picture nine years ago and now is not, it is not historical Ruy Lopez (talk) 20:55, 20 September 2009 (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. Otherwise, unless there is another reason for listing here, the listing will be closed by an administrator and the image kept. AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:50, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. On the contrary, this photo seems like a fairly standard instance of fair use. Additionally, the fact that you personally don't know of any histories that mention Elian Gonzales isn't exactly probative. A cursory Google Books examination turns up plenty, some of the more notable including p.904 of Bill Clinton's "My Life," a work on Cuban Studies [6], and p.105 of "United States foreign policy after the Cold War. While it is certainly not newsworthy, as you note, its use as a reference image is still quite significant. Taking the down-sampling of the image with the nonprofit reference context, I'm confident that the photo remains allowed via fair use. OldDaedalus (talk) 09:15, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

keep - this is a 2001 Pulitzer Prize winning photograph and can be used to illustrate some text discussing the famous photograph itself. --Damiens.rf 20:03, 19 October 2009 (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:HA! old logo.jpg

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:52, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Former logo of a television channel. I doubt this has been released under a free license. J Milburn (talk) 22:19, 20 September 2009 (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:Nikmag93.jpg

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:33, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cover of a magazine. I doubt this has been freely released. J Milburn (talk) 22:19, 20 September 2009 (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.