Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 May 16
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 12:31, 4 June 2022 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
May 16
[edit]
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:00, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Possibly unfree. Mikemoral♪♫ 01:33, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - The terms of use at Photobucket are clear. Changed to a different, valid license consistent with other Photobucket images used on Wikipedia such as File:Tia Tanaka.JPG. - Wallanon (talk) 01:54, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Photobucket's terms do not mean the image is public domain. Eeekster (talk) 03:48, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually that seems to be exactly what their terms say if a person chooses to post images there. And if not, then what is the license for a Photobucket image based on its terms of use? I posted it under a Creative Commons license because there was no specific license cited on Photobucket, then I had someone come behind me and say that I couldn't set the license even though it was a derived work of a non-attribution file. Instead of splitting hairs with everyone, why doesn't someone point people spending hours tracking down images with terms of use compatible with Wikipedia's to a reference? This process is a total time sink. Before a final decision against is made I am requesting that an admin level user provide a credible, grounded explanation for why this type of cited image cannot stay when there are countless precedents all over Wikipedia. - Wallanon (talk) 04:30, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- One of the mods over at the Commons says this image is a crop of an image used in an online game (http://www.thejackpotgame.com/Scrapbook_Game/Stripper1.jpg) and the game owner holds the copyright. If that is true, then I concur with the Delete on the grounds it is in violation of copyright. I do not concede that an image being moved over from Photobucket warrants an automatic flag without the person placing the notes doing any diligence whatsoever. - Wallanon (talk) 08:45, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually that seems to be exactly what their terms say if a person chooses to post images there. And if not, then what is the license for a Photobucket image based on its terms of use? I posted it under a Creative Commons license because there was no specific license cited on Photobucket, then I had someone come behind me and say that I couldn't set the license even though it was a derived work of a non-attribution file. Instead of splitting hairs with everyone, why doesn't someone point people spending hours tracking down images with terms of use compatible with Wikipedia's to a reference? This process is a total time sink. Before a final decision against is made I am requesting that an admin level user provide a credible, grounded explanation for why this type of cited image cannot stay when there are countless precedents all over Wikipedia. - Wallanon (talk) 04:30, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete Copyvio. Tagged for WP:CSD. Mikemoral♪♫ 02:57, 18 May 2010 (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 file 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 tagged as non-free. -FASTILY (TALK) 01:43, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- License appears to be false. Eeekster (talk) 03:39, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete No evidence of permission for copyrighted work. Tagged. Mikemoral♪♫ 05:18, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]- Keep Didn't notice fair use tag. Mikemoral♪♫ 05:19, 18 May 2010 (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⚡ 03:00, 26 May 2010 (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 file 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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:05, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Kristen wiig emmys.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- This image is a copyright violation, see the identical image published at http://www.harpersbazaar.com/fashion/party-snaps/emmys-2009-red-carpet.
image #31 in the slideshow on that page. Wildhartlivie (talk) 04:47, 16 May 2010 (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:10eastern drawing of the album cover for Brian Eno's album Ambient 1 Music for Airports.png
[edit]
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:05, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:10eastern drawing of the album cover for Brian Eno's album Ambient 1 Music for Airports.png (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Image is a derivative of a non-free image File:Music for Airports.jpg the author is most likely in copyvio to the original. IngerAlHaosului (talk) 13:40, 16 May 2010 (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 file 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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:05, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Davidmilhousvenice.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Looks like a pro-shot - skeptical of self claim Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:15, 16 May 2010 (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 file 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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:05, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Lippy's Garden.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Looks like promotional photo - Skeptical of self claim Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:18, 16 May 2010 (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 file 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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:05, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Pic-monogram.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Many similarities with a currently non-free file, e.g. very similar logo structure and uploader. The Evil IP address (talk) 18:43, 16 May 2010 (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 file 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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:05, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Lab-monogram.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Logo, I doubt the self claim, has been wrongly used by this uploader already, e.g. here. The Evil IP address (talk) 18:46, 16 May 2010 (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 file 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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:05, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Olsa-monogram.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Logo, I doubt the self claim, has been wrongly used by this uploader already, e.g. here. Doesn't appear to be necessary to illustrate the article. The Evil IP address (talk) 18:48, 16 May 2010 (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 file 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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:05, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:NZ-RNZSIGS-Badge.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Looks like an insignia - so not self... Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:27, 16 May 2010 (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 file 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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:05, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:FrancisMcDonaldsilent.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- File indicates this was taken before 1923, however there's no source information which is needed for confirmation. Thirdship (talk) 21:35, 16 May 2010 (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 file 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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:05, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:MPYS 2.png (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Clearly Google Streetview UI - So not self as claimed Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:46, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- You caught me red-handed!Tkfy7cf (talk) 21:51, 16 May 2010 (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 file 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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:05, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:RoyDarcy.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- File indicates this was published before 1923, however there's no source information which is needed for confirmation. Thirdship (talk) 21:53, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The filmography at the source site (http://www.silentsaregolden.com) indicates he wasn't in a film until 1925. That suggests the picture was not taken before 1923 as claimed. Eeekster (talk) 21:57, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Roy D'Arcy was born in 1894, and doesn't look so young on the picture. He made film debut in 1925. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0195460/ Thus, this is unlikely to be pre-1923. Thirdship (talk) 12:23, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The image is like possibly not copyrighted if it was not renewed. See [1] Mikemoral♪♫ 05:39, 18 May 2010 (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.