Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 March 21
March 21
[edit]
- 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⚡ 03:50, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
User initially gave no copyright info, when CSD was initiated said it was own work and public domain, and was from http://www.daegufc.co.kr/ and then changed to CC license when challenged. No evidence of permission to use has been provided. Fences and windows (talk) 00:37, 21 March 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.
- 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⚡ 03:50, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
User initially gave no copyright info, when CSD was initiated said it was own work and public domain, and was from http://www.daegufc.co.kr/ and then changed to CC license when challenged. No evidence of permission to use has been provided. Fences and windows (talk) 00:37, 21 March 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.
- 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 Ged UK (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 23:10, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Photo appears to have been taken from this webpage, which is copyrighted, despite the uploader claiming it was their own work. It doesn't look like the uploader owns this site. 94.193.255.112 (talk) 19:17, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I own the site linked to above, and can confirm the user doesn't have permission to copy it. Johnny (talk) 19:34, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I have tagged several for speedy already, I suspect many more will come Jenuk1985 | Talk 19:36, 21 March 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.
- 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⚡ 07:03, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Blatant TV screenshot (evidence both in TV PG in top left and the compression on the image, which suggests a VHS rip), unlikely uploader is copyright holder. — neuro(talk)(review) 03:55, 21 March 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.
- 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⚡ 07:03, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Blatant TV rip; uploader has also uploaded non-free TV screenshots as PD, unlikely uploader is copyright holder. — neuro(talk)(review) 03:57, 21 March 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.
- 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⚡ 07:03, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Blatant TV screenshot, unlikely uploader is copyright holder. — neuro(talk)(review) 03:57, 21 March 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.
- 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⚡ 07:03, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Blatant TV screenshot, unlikely uploader is copyright holder. — neuro(talk)(review) 03:57, 21 March 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.
- 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: Kept, successful OTRS. – Quadell (talk) 17:25, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unable to find CC at source. — neuro(talk)(review) 03:59, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I received the email by email from the author. His website is linked, and graphical email address there. I set a respectable licensing option for him so future usage would require attribution. What do you need from me? SockPuppetForTomruen (talk) 04:29, 21 March 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.
- 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: Kept, successful OTRS. – Quadell (talk) 17:26, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unable to find CC at source. — neuro(talk)(review) 04:00, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I received the email by email from the author. His website is linked, and graphical email address there. I set a respectable licensing option for him so future usage would require attribution. What do you need from me? SockPuppetForTomruen (talk) 04:29, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- This makes no sense to me. Please tell me what I need to do. SockPuppetForTomruen (talk) 18:06, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- You need to forward the email to the email listed at m:OTRS#Permissions. — neuro(talk)(review) 18:38, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, I see no email address there. SockPuppetForTomruen (talk) 19:11, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Neuro meant Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission#When permission is confirmed, perhaps? —Bkell (talk) 13:34, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay, I failed step one already, says I'm supposed to upload to commons, while I uploaded to english wiki. SockPuppetForTomruen (talk) 01:41, 23 March 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.
- 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: Not deleted. – Quadell (talk) 17:27, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Uploader and creator tagged this image with {{fair use}}, which was a redirect to a redirect to {{non-free restricted use}}, which is not a free license. This image is self-created but not free. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 04:37, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Image was uploaded in 2005. The author and uploader stated in the edit summary, "({{fair use}} Personal picture taken by myself)". It also states on that actual page, "Personal picture taken by myself". It's obvious the author/uploader's goal was to allow an image he took, to be used on Wikipedia. At the time the author/uploader used the {{fair use}} tag, there was no redirect of it to {{non-free restricted use}}. 8 months later, another user changed the tag to {{GFDL-presumed}}. 3 years and 2 months later, the nominator here comes along and undoes the retag and tags the image for speedy. I contested it because it's obviously a "legacy" image.. one uploaded before 2006. It's also obvious the author/uploader intended for the image to be used here and states that he took the picture. Is there evidence otherwise? Is anyone else or any business claiming ownership of the image? What was the content of {{ fair use}} before it was deleted in 2007 - and again in 2008? - ✰ALLST☆R✰ echo 12:37, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Concur, the intended message needs to be determined. — neuro(talk)(review) 13:42, 21 March 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.
- 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⚡ 07:03, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Blatant copyvio of [1] — neuro(talk)(review) 07:29, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
![[1]](http://p2.p.pixnet.net/albums/userpics/2/5/528125/1190748952.jpg){kind=link}
- 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.
- 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⚡ 07:03, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unable to find PD at source. — neuro(talk)(review) 07:31, 21 March 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.
- 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⚡ 07:03, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unable to find PD at source. — neuro(talk)(review) 07:31, 21 March 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.
- 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 Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 19:07, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Screenshot of copyrighted program. — neuro(talk)(review) 09:01, 21 March 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.
- 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 Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 19:07, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Claimed {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}, but Flickr source page says it's licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 2.0 Generic. "No Derivative Works" is not free by Wikipedia's standards. —Bkell (talk) 12:51, 21 March 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.
- 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⚡ 07:03, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Watermark states "(c) 2007 Linda Sutton". — neuro(talk)(review) 13:41, 21 March 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.
- 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⚡ 07:03, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No CC at source. — neuro(talk)(review) 13:46, 21 March 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.
- 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.
Unable to find CC at source. — neuro(talk)(review) 14:53, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am the author of File:Chassis-plans-Digital-IO-Card.jpg. I took the photograph and uploaded the image. There is no copyright issue. The copyright notice on the board is for the board, not an image thereof. Rackmount-guy (talk) 17:33, 21 March 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.
- 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: retagged NPD. – Quadell (talk) 17:31, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No PD at source. — neuro(talk)(review) 17:10, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I will work on getting permission for this image. give me a week - ChristianWelsh
- 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.
- 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: retagged as npd. – Quadell (talk) 17:34, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No PD at source. — neuro(talk)(review) 17:10, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I will work on getting permission for this image.
- 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.
- 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: Delete. These two are difficult to determine consensus on, but I feel that the current evidence would suggest that deletion is the better course of action.. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 02:03, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Uploader's explanation of source leads me to believe that these are actually (c) held by the "Press Information Bureau" - from my talk page...
- "I was deputed to the Press Information Bureau ,New Delhi,India by the government of India ,where I obtained the following photographs : 1)Hitsquadspg.jpg ( Independence Day celebration at Red Fort,New Delhi, India) 2)Paracommandos.jpg ( during the Indian Army day celebrations in 2009 ) 3)Indiancommandos.jpg ( during the Republic Day celebrations of India on 26th Jan,2009)" Skier Dude (talk) 19:01, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. I believe the uploader is saying he was sent on behalf of the Press Information Bureau, not that he got the photos from that site. I have done an exhaustive search through the photos there (e.g. [2]), and not only do I not see these images there, but these images appear to be lower quality than the ones on that site. I think these are self-created as claimed on the description page: "This photograph was taken by me, during the Independence Day celebrations at the Red Fort, New Delhi, India." – Quadell (talk) 18:12, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- If "deputed" means deputized, wouldn't that make them work for hire and thus not the photographer's copyright? Chick Bowen 15:53, 25 April 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.
- 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: Delete. These two are difficult to determine consensus on, but I feel that the current evidence would suggest that deletion is the better course of action.. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 02:03, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Uploader's explanation of source leads me to believe that these are actually (c) held by the "Press Information Bureau" - from my talk page...
- "I was deputed to the Press Information Bureau ,New Delhi,India by the government of India ,where I obtained the following photographs : 1)Hitsquadspg.jpg ( Independence Day celebration at Red Fort,New Delhi, India) 2)Paracommandos.jpg ( during the Indian Army day celebrations in 2009 ) 3)Indiancommandos.jpg ( during the Republic Day celebrations of India on 26th Jan,2009)" Skier Dude (talk) 19:01, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, as above. – Quadell (talk) 18:12, 17 April 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.
- 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 Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 20:08, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Uploader's explanation of source leads me to believe that these are actually (c) held by the "Indian Naval ARchives" - from my talk page...
- "The file (Kolkata-class DDG.jpg ) is a jpeg version of the work done by Indian Naval architects using CATIA V5 R14,which was in my possession for some time before it was officially released to the press, by the Indian Navy. Skier Dude (talk) 19:02, 21 March 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.
