|This image may not have the proper copyright or licensing information, or there is a conflict of license.
An experienced editor should contact the uploader and add the proper tag, or discuss the issue on the talk page.
If the image has no source, add
Add this tag (do not subst) immediately above any licensing information. You may optionally specify a reason as the first parameter. Do not replace or remove any copyright or licensing information already present.
This template is meant to be used when an image's licensing information appears to be incorrect or inaccurate, to prompt discussion or review by other editors. If an image has blatantly false licensing information, such as a screenshot of a recent film tagged as public domain, useone of the templates below.
Use this template if:
- The image is unlikely to have the proper licensing information.
- The image's source contains licensing information that conflicts with the information on the image's description page (unless the below criteria are met).
Do not use this template if:
- There is no source information at all. Use
- There is no licensing information at all. Use
- There is a license claimed but it does not appear to be a valid claim. Use
- The image is a blatant copyright infringement and meets speedy deletion criterion F9. Use
- The image is possibly non-free as described at Wikipedia:Files for discussion.
Images tagged with this template are placed in Category:Wikipedia files with disputed copyright information.
- Wikipedia:Media copyright questions
- Category:All disputed non-free Wikipedia files
- Category:Possible copyright violations
- Wikipedia:Fair use review
- Copyright Term and the Public Domain in the United States, a handy copyright reference
|The above documentation is transcluded from Template:Wrong-license/doc. (edit | history)
Editors can experiment in this template's sandbox (create | mirror) and testcases (create) pages.
Please add categories to the /doc subpage. Subpages of this template.