Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2006 August 11

< August 10	August 12 >

August 11

Image:BATTLENETHERLANDS1.JPG (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Rex Germanus (notify | contribs). Image is restricted to educational use only. Klosterdev 00:05, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

... so the problem here is that wikipedia can't guarantee that the image will be used for just that purpose. Hmm, would this problem be solved by marking this image? As in the image itself? Rex 10:21, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No. Everything on Wikipedia must be freely usable, for commercial as well as noncommercial use. —Bkell (talk 16:06, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you made visible on the image that is for educational purposes only that would be ensured wouldn't it? Rex 10:13, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, Wikipedia does not allow educational-only images, unless they are used under a claim of fair use. It's a Wikipedia policy. It doesn't matter how many times you state that the image is for educational use only, or if you say it on the image itself. Three types of images are usable on Wikipedia: those in the public domain, where nobody can claim copyright on the image (usually due to copyright having expired); freely licensed images, where anyone can use or modify the image for any purpose, commercial or noncommercial; and fair-use images, which are copyrighted, unlicensed images that satisfy all ten points of the Wikipedia fair-use policy. Educational-only images, noncommercial-only images, and images whose modification is prohibited are not allowed unless they are used under claims of fair use, because these are not free licenses. —Bkell (talk) 13:15, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Asala.png (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Clevelander (notify | contribs). Speedy delete. An image I created and uploaded. --Clevelander 00:23, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- FYI, you can tag it with {{db-author}} to request speedy deletion. BigDT 01:42, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Even Piell.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Kasparov (notify | contribs). OR, probably not really a free use image BigDT 01:30, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ultimate Magneto.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Kasparov (notify | contribs). OR, probably not really a free use image BigDT 01:35, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Seymour cray.gif (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Devil dog (notify | contribs). OR, probably not really free use BigDT 01:42, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Bronzeageireland.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by EamonnPKeane (notify | contribs). OR, probably not really free use BigDT 01:46, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ireland dio.gif (talk | delete)

Uploaded by EamonnPKeane (notify | contribs). Source website [1] gives no indication that this is a free-use image or even that they made it themselves. BigDT 01:52, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Noriega2.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by EamonnPKeane (notify | contribs). Source website [2] gives no indication this is a free-use image and it appears that the source is just a collection of (likely) copyrighted images. Thus, we don't even know the original source. BigDT 01:54, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:World Map FIFA2.JPG (talk | delete)

Uploaded by EamonnPKeane (notify | contribs). OR, redundant to Image:World Map FIFA2.png BigDT 01:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Snowmangma 2.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by EamonnPKeane (notify | contribs). Source website gives no indication this is a free use image BigDT 01:59, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Kkahm.gif (talk | delete)

Uploaded by EamonnPKeane (notify | contribs). Source website specifically prohibits commercial use and derivative works [3]. This image is not free. BigDT 02:01, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Amicipr.gif (talk | delete)

Uploaded by EamonnPKeane (notify | contribs). OR, Source website gives no indication this is a free image BigDT 02:02, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ergot.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by EamonnPKeane (notify | contribs). Source website gives no indication this is a free image BigDT 02:03, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Sprimepr.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by DrTofu83 (notify | contribs). Orphan, replaced by Image:Sprimepr.PNG- HKMARKS 02:05, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Matchgirl.gif (talk | delete)

Uploaded by EamonnPKeane (notify | contribs). No indication from source website that this is a free image BigDT 02:06, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:24 min.jpeg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Gategoer (notify | contribs). OR, UE, WP:NFT, presumably used in deleted article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/24 Minutes BigDT 02:07, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:24 pic.png (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Gategoer (notify | contribs). OR, UE, WP:NFT, presumably used in deleted article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/24 Minutes BigDT 02:09, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:CRU EMBLEM.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Gategoer (notify | contribs). OR, UE, WP:NFT, presumably used in deleted article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/24 Minutes BigDT 02:10, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:24 DVD.png (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Gategoer (notify | contribs). OR, UE, WP:NFT, presumably used in deleted article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/24 Minutes BigDT 02:10, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Tony.png (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Gategoer (notify | contribs). OR, UE, WP:NFT, presumably used in deleted article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/24 Minutes BigDT 02:11, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Jack.png (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Gategoer (notify | contribs). OR, UE, WP:NFT, presumably used in deleted article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/24 Minutes BigDT 02:11, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Adam_trinh.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Artium (notify | contribs). OR, UE, WP:NFT, presumably used in deleted article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/24 Minutes Kaido_8 02:07, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:CheetahGirls3.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Jtervin (notify | contribs). UE, OR, possible CV. Obvious fake "promo poster" for the non-existant The Cheetah Girls 3. NeoChaosX (talk | contribs) 10:11, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Jf-17.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by MajesticX (notify | contribs). Hampered by a watermark in the middle of the picture. Claimed promotional fair use; article already has several fair use images. theProject 04:58, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:CongressWarVote.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Cruise (notify | contribs). Orphan, seems to have been superseded by Image:USCongressWarVote.jpg. —Bkell (talk) 06:18, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:IncarcerationGrowth.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Cruise (notify | contribs). Orphan, superseded by Image:Incarceration.jpg. —Bkell (talk) 06:29, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Variance 1.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Cruise (notify | contribs). Orphan, would be better as a real table (i.e., not an image). —Bkell (talk) 06:40, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:True Variance 1.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Cruise (notify | contribs). Orphan, would be better represented with math markup. —Bkell (talk) 06:41, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:True Variance 2.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Cruise (notify | contribs). Orphan, would be better represented with math markup. —Bkell (talk) 06:43, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:True Variance 3.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Cruise (notify | contribs). Orphan, would be better as a real table (i.e., not an image). —Bkell (talk) 06:44, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:True Variance 4.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Cruise (notify | contribs). Orphan, would be better represented with math markup. —Bkell (talk) 06:45, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:True Variance 5.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Cruise (notify | contribs). Orphan, would be better represented with math markup. —Bkell (talk) 06:46, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Symbol_neutral_vote.svg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Zscout370 (notify | contribs). Duplicated of commons:Image:Symbol neutral vote.svg. -- ADNghiem501 06:50, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Hierarchical Scale.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Cruise (notify | contribs). Orphan, would be better as a real table (i.e., not an image). —Bkell (talk) 06:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Amariyah B.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Cruise (notify | contribs). Orphan, and I question the uploader's claim of authorship. —Bkell (talk) 07:00, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Cruise.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Cruise (notify | contribs). Orphan, unhelpful filename. I'm not sure which ancient Greek this is, but we almost certainly have a better-named image. —Bkell (talk) 07:04, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Cruise 1.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Cruise (notify | contribs). Orphan, redundant to Image:Aristoteles Louvre.jpg. —Bkell (talk) 07:06, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All uploaded by User:The Anomebot (bot maintainer has been informed that I'm posting these for deletion). OB, OR by these images on Commons. --Fritz S. (Talk) 11:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Flag of muscat.png (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Abigail-II (notify | contribs). replaced by svg Ysangkok 12:20, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Mindspillage a la Emo.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Essjay (notify | contribs). OR, UE, What the? BigDT 12:43, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On a previous revision of User:Mindspillage: "Essjay having way too much fun with my userpage again..."[4] Tito xd^(?!?) 08:35, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was a silly image in response to a silly conversation; if Kat wants it deleted, she'll delete it. Otherwise, what's it hurting, it's just as valid as the images on User:Jimbo Wales/Funny pictures. Essjay (Talk) 02:53, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't used anywhere, so it seems reasonable to me to assume that Kat wants it deleted. —Bkell (talk) 03:46, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:SAPOLmap2.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Amscott (notify | contribs). No evidence that the copyright holder has released all rights BigDT 12:45, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:SAPOLmap1.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Amscott (notify | contribs). Not a logo, there is no fair use justification for using this map BigDT 12:46, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:MalHyde.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Amscott (notify | contribs). OR, no evidence the copyright holder has released all rights BigDT 12:47, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:City-torrens.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Amscott (notify | contribs). OR, image from a commercial photography website, no evidence the photographer has released all rights- BigDT 12:50, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Field command vehivle.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Amscott (notify | contribs). No evidence the copyright holder has released all rights BigDT 12:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Star operation image.gif (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Amscott (notify | contribs). OR, no evidence the copyright holder has released all rights- BigDT 12:52, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:12kg 2005.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Anelson‎ (notify | contribs). OR, UE- BigDT 12:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Scot.JPG (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Sportskido8 (notify | contribs). OR cholmes75 ^{(chit chat)} 13:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:CarrefourLogo.png (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Graffity (notify | contribs). OB by Image:Carrefour.png and Image:Groupe carrefour.png - ^Рэд _хот 13:53, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CV - All the preceding images were obtained from the gallery on http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com/al/nyyanks/yankeesimages.html. Uploader states that he received permission (GFDL) from someone at the site to use the images. However, it is highly unlikely that the site owns the copyrights in the first place, so such permission is moot. There is no information on who took the photographs, or where they originally appeared. These all appear to be copyright violations. --cholmes75 ^{(chit chat)} 14:06, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm writing an email to MLB.com and I'm sure that since this article is in the best interests of everybody that THEY will give me permission and finally end this debacle. So please do not delete these yet because I am in the process of doing this. --Sportskido8

First, make sure that you ask for these images to be released under a free license, such as the GFDL, and not just ask for permission for these images to be used on Wikipedia, which is not sufficient. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. Second, do you know that MLB.com owns the copyright on these images and can legally license them? —Bkell (talk) 16:11, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the MLB owns them but because I wasn't sure I emailed the SportsEcyclopedia guy again and asked him what the original source was. He should get back to me shortly. --Sportskido8 (talk) 12:45, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He still hasn't answered yet, I need more time. Please do not delete these before I get an answer, it would be devastating to the article. ----Sportskido8 (talk) 11:16, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, here's the thing guys. Mr. Fleming has told me that he gathered all of the images up over the past 5 years from NON-COPYRIGHTED sources. He runs a very reputable site (Sports E-Cyclopedia) and I believe him. He wouldn't show them himself if they were copyrighted. No, I don't know who the original photographer was, but nobody else on this planet really gives a damn. You need to let these pictures stay. The article needs them, and nobody is complaining about them. Plus, they are not copyrighted. Please get these off the deletion page and do this site a favor by keeping a good article intact. --Sportskido8 (talk) 12:39 EST, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

- Delete. Wikipedia isn't everyone else on the planet. Wikipedia is a free-content encyclopedia and we cannot use an image unless we know for a fact that it is free. Without knowing the original source, we are left in the position of having to decide whether Mr. Flemming correctly understands copyright law enough to make an accurate determination of whether the images are copyrighted or not. Unless it's an image that we know for a fact was published before 1923, we can't really use it. BigDT 02:47, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Keep. Fleming wouldn't have put them on his site if they were copyrighted because it gets a lot of traffic and he faces the same bullshit laws that Wikipedia has to deal with. And if they have been on THAT site for so long without him getting a complaint about them, then I really, really doubt that they are copyrighted and that there will be a problem here. There is absolutely no reason to delete these pictures. Sportskido8 11:44 PST, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Delete. They are almost certainly copyrighted, since all creative works are automatically copyrighted when they are created, and nearly no one releases their rights. These images were probably taken by professional photographers, who are the least likely to release their rights. We have no information about who took these photos, when they were taken, when and where they were first published, and so on. If you claim they are not copyrighted, it is up to you to prove that. Circumstantial evidence isn't enough here. It is unusual for copyright holders to take action against Web sites for copyright violations, so the fact that the Sports E-Cyclopedia hasn't gotten a complaint is no proof at all that these photos are not copyrighted. —Bkell (talk) 03:08, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Source website almost assuredly does not own copyright on these images. -- No Guru 19:24, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever. The photographers who took these pictures obviously don't give a shit about them because if they really did they would find them on google and go after the person using them "unfairly". But the picture nazis don't think about things like this so they just say "DELETE!" whenever they get a chance to. Oh well... Sportskido8 10:06 PST, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
You think professional photographers have the time and resources to sit in front of a computer and do Google searches in an attempt to find copyright violations of their photographs on the Internet, track down the Web site author, and "go after" the person who uploaded them? Just because someone is unable to enforce their copyright for one reason or another doesn't mean that the violation of this copyright isn't illegal. —Bkell (talk) 06:30, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll bet you $1000 that if you leave those images on there that you will never ever receive a complaint from a photographer. At this point in their lives do they really give a damn? I think they would be flattered to see their work on such a popular page, and honestly not care. Can you seriously take the bet I promise I'll pay up if I have to.Sportskido8 1:35 EST, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't matter. Legality is not determined by whether the copyright holder complains. —Bkell (talk) 15:12, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Face it Bkell. These are BASEBALL photographers. They will know about BASEBALL websites because they contain BASEBALL pictures, especially really popular ones like SPORTS E-CYCLOPEDIA. These pictures were put on FIVE YEARS AGO to that website. If they wanted to complain, they would have by now, because it is so easy to find them. I refuse to believe that these pictures need to be taken off in the case of an indifferent photographer or two. It would be ruining an article for no reason. Sometimes you need to look past what is written in stone and use common sense. Yes, Wikipedia is popular, but so is that website. Fleming took a bigger "risk" than this site is doing, which is practically none at all at this point. Nothing happened to him. Can you PLEASE drop this issue already and leave the article alone? Seriously...--Sportskido8 14:39 EST, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Delete already. The arguments made to keep these unsourced images are completely irrelevent to the issue of complying with copyright law and proper licensing. -Seidenstud 19:44, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Also, why is Image:Mantlemaris.jpg excluded from the preceding list? -Seidenstud 19:47, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Do us all a favor Seiden and delete yourself. Straight edge people like you wet your pants when you see something written down and are afraid of getting in trouble. It is simply retarded to delete the images ahead of time before anyone complains about it, which WOULDN'T HAPPEN ANYWAY. Why don't you delete them after someone takes credit for the photos and says they don't want them on there? You think they're going to take you to court? And you don't even know that they are copyrighted. Give me a frickin break. Use your brains once in a while. --Sportskido8 16:07 EST, 21 August 2006

Image:Eric and Natalia.JPG (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Natibbkf (notify | contribs). OR, UE, uploader's only two contributions were uploading two copies of this vanity pic BigDT 14:10, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Muhammad-Letter-To-Heraclius.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Ibrahimfaisal (notify | contribs). CV. The image was scanned from Khan, Dr. Majid Ali (1998). Muhammad The Final Messenger. Islamic Book Service, New Delhi, 110002 (India). ISBN 81-85738-25-4. Neither the author of the original photo in the book, nor the copyright status of the image are known. The uploader claims unique historic photograph justification for fair use; however, this claim is wrong because if the document is authentic, then the photograph is not unique: it can be done by anyone, who has a permission to photograph this document at the archive where it is stored. Pecher ^Talk 14:35, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Please read the fair-use-tag used by me. The tag so much correctly describe the image status, that I think it could not be better described. If the tag is saying exactly what the image is and the tag is provided by wikipedia then why the image can be deleted? Also please read the detailed [source comments of mine at the image page]. Remember the image is (more than 14) centuries old. The tag is {{HistoricPhoto}} --- Faisal 14:58, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- It may be ineligible for copyright ... I'm still not particularly comfortable with just copying images from a book, even though it is almost certainly ineligible for copyright. BigDT 15:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - If it's just a "slavish copy" of the original document, then there can be no copyright held by the photographer, so we should be fine: the image is in the public domain. It would be nice if we could get a non-green image without a caption, though. —Bkell (talk) 16:14, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- An important thing to note is that there is no evidence from scholarly sources that the document on the image is authentic. Most likely, it's a forgery by the book's author who thus obviously holds rights to this work. Very few authentic sources are available from that place and time. The whole list of such sources is in Historiography of early Islam, and this letter is not on the list. Pecher ^Talk 17:05, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ah, well, that changes a lot, if true. —Bkell (talk) 17:23, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Per request as above, I've made a black & white version of the image and cropped out the caption. Image may be viewed at Image:B&W-MuhammadToHeraclius.jpg. If the image we are discussing needs to be deleted, then so does this image. Use as you will. --Durin 18:04, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thanks for the great work Durin. I have replaced the image that I have with your image. Hence now the above image is available in B&W format without any caption. I hope it will satisfy the copyright issues. Durin can you please delete the new created image of yours? Now as far as the Mr. Pecher is concern then please do not make him God. How can he say something and a publish work could become null. I could try to find other places where it is published but why I must waste my time to satisfied Pecher unjustified demand. Instead, I can use that same time to work on wikipedia articles. I hope you will give more respect to published work (and wikipedia reliable resources policy) than Pecher without any merits saying. Listen many books mentioned that Muhammad write letter to that person (I can give references). Now tell me what a writer will achieve to forge a letter and put in his book when other books say that such a letter was written by Muhammad. I can admit that he might be forging only if he twisting a historical event by presenting that picture. Otherwise commonsense says that any writer cannot forge a picture and put his credibility in danger for nothing. I rest my case. ---- Faisal 18:36, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - Well, converting the image to black and white and removing the caption doesn't change anything about the copyright. The question, apparently, is whether this letter was created by Muhammad centuries ago, or created by the author of the book in 1998. I am no expert by any means, so I can't offer any opinions on this matter. If it is a forgery, however, it would technically be under copyright, since it was created in the 1990s. On the other hand, the author of the book is unlikely to claim copyright on it, because a copyright claim would be valid only if the letter were a forgery. So we can probably assume that this image is in the public domain and use it to illustrate an appropriate article; but if there really is a debate on its authenticity, that should be mentioned in the article, with references, of course. If it later turns out that this letter was indeed forged, then we will have to re-investigate the copyright status. —Bkell (talk) 18:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - Do you have any other sources authenticating this particular letter? There are plenty of hoaxes that have been published where the modern author has pretended to have found an ancient document. Sometimes it is for fame. Sometimes it is to advance his or her beliefs. Consider Talmud Jmmanuel - it is a 20th century forgery published to give credence to UFOs. Just look at False document and take your pick - there are plenty of times where people have forged documents. Is there any evidence, separate from the author of this one book, that can support or refute the claims that this is a copy of a letter Muhammad wrote? BigDT 18:55, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      - No I do not have other source with the picture but I have other sources saying that such a letter was indeed written. But that does not mean that other sources does not exist. I do not think that I would like to use my time on this anymore and will like to spend hours searching in library for other sources (for no reason). If someone do not want to assume good faith, which is one of the important aspect of wikipedia then it is a useless debate. Also it is a published work. I am not able to find any prove that if author really have got any fame or alter facts by publishing that picture. Having said that if someone still wants to delete it then so be it. --- Faisal 20:42, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        The policy to assume good faith means only that we should assume that other Wikipedia editors are not acting maliciously. It does not mean that we should assume that what they write is correct, or that we should assume that any one source is correct. If there really is a debate on the authenticity of this letter, then someone should write something about this debate, with references. If there is no debate, then I don't see what the problem is. —Bkell (talk) 21:30, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        I googled various combinations of the author's name, "hoax", "forgery", and the name of the recipient of the letter and couldn't find anything claiming it is a hoax. At any rate, I'm now inclined to at least believe this is enough of a content dispute that it is beyond the scope of IFD to try and figure out the veracity of historic documents. BigDT 22:25, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        Actually, the onus to prove the authenticity of the image is with the book's author and then with the uploader; we won't be able to find any accusations of hoax simply because the author is a very minor figure, not recognized as an authority in the academe. Unless the author is able to provide references as to where he got the original copy of this letter, we'll have to assume it's a forgery and thus copyrighted. I've read quite a few academic sources on the early Islam, none of them suggests that the original of this letter has preserved. It's difficult to prove something in the negative (i.e., that the original document does not exist); therefore, we'll need to have proofs from reliable academic sources that it does exist. Pecher ^Talk 20:17, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not deleted. This discussion is beyond the scope of IFD. I've tagged it with {{PD-old}}, but its authenticity should be debated at Image talk:Muhammad-Letter-To-Heraclius.jpg or Talk:Muhammad. howch e ng {chat} 16:42, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:ShapeWrapII.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Limited (notify | contribs). Image has a mark of ownership, description page is an advertisement, no evidence the owner has actually released rights to it. BigDT 15:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:FlamedudeSiggy4jmtb02forums.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Flamedude (notify | contribs). Orphan, unencyclopedic. —Bkell (talk) 16:44, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Merkageonyou'sAvatar.gif (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Flamedude (notify | contribs). Orphan, unencyclopedic; tagged with GFDL, but it's unclear that the original creator (a Merkageonyou) has freely released his images. —Bkell (talk) 16:44, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for reasons given above, and its use of the Super Mario mushroom makes it a probable copyvio as well. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 18:04, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Planets.pdf (talk | delete)

Uploaded by PaoloAllievi (notify | contribs). OR (original research and orphaned) BigDT 18:01, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:N1648290027 30000606 9820.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by BMackenzie (notify | contribs). UE, OR BigDT 18:25, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:EbwGARDEN.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Cire1893 (notify | contribs). OR, summary is, "This photo is being used with the author's permission." BigDT 18:27, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:EightBall MJG-40.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by LilMane (notify | contribs). Fair use image with no rationale. It was uploaded before May 2006, and thus cannot be speedied. BigDT 18:39, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:IMG 0857.JPG (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Chris2008 (notify | contribs). Orphaned, insufficient context to determine encyclopedic use- BigDT 18:41, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:3 Memphis Bridges.JPG (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Chris2008 (notify | contribs). OR, UE BigDT 18:44, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:612722471 l.jpg(talk | delete)

Uploaded by Ryrankin (notify | contribs). UE.--Isotope23 19:10, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:KingKaufman.gif (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Jajasoon (notify | contribs).Is not a screenshot, doesn't meet the fair use requirement. This image is taken from salon.com, without permission. It is, however, not a screenshot. On the fair-use side, a replacement image could easily be found - Kaufman has demonstrated in the press an interest in the success of his Wikipedia article and could easily submit a GFDL-ed replacement image as he and his readers are following the progress of this article. Dwiki 20:07, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Sixoone-Ngugi2267.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Sixoone (notify | contribs). Watermark is a blight on the image. Can we get a redone image? Thanks.- theProject 20:09, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Strmbrkr.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Britishagent (notify | contribs). Only used in an image gallery (doesn't fall under fair use) Hbdragon88 20:21, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:LMC.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Hurricane Devon (notify | contribs). Source has been disputed by Brian Brondel, who says it is probably a noncommercial-only image. As such, it would be unacceptable for use on Wikipedia. —Bkell (talk) 20:26, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Estk.JPG (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Popperbop (notify | contribs). Used in an image gallery (doesn't fall under fair use) Hbdragon88 20:26, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Scorp.JPG (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Popperbop (notify | contribs). No source. Only used in an image gallery (does not fall under fair use) Hbdragon88 20:27, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Arkangl.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Britishagent (notify | contribs). No source. Only used in an image gallery (improper fair use) Hbdragon88 20:28, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Pblc.JPG (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Popperbop (notify | contribs). Only used in an image gallery (doesn't fall under fair use) Hbdragon88 20:29, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Skl.JPG (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Popperbop (notify | contribs). Only used in an image gallery (doesn't fall under fair use) Hbdragon88 20:29, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Stormbreaker2.jpg (talk | delete)

Uploaded by Weirdy (notify | contribs). Page already had two other book covers and this version looks like a thumbnail; Image:AnthonyHorowitz_Stormbreaker.jpg is bigger and better image quality Hbdragon88 20:33, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]