Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 July 10

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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial magazine covers, uploader unlikely to hold copyright. Polly (Parrot) 01:40, 10 July 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: Keep. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 00:58, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a promotional image from a website, no evidence uploader holds copyright. Polly (Parrot) 01:42, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a cropped image taken during a visit to the KSL studio in the Triad Center in mid 2006. User:padishar88 11:26, 10 July 2009 (MST)

Keep. I'm inclined to assume good faith on this one unless evidence can be shown that this is infringing. A crop would explain the lack of metadata, and the user has no history of misidentifying non-free images as being free. IronGargoyle (talk) 13:43, 4 August 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 Dougweller (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 09:36, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence the uploader is the copyright holder. Polly (Parrot) 02:38, 10 July 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: Keep. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 00:58, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Small image size and lack of meta data makes it likely this image came from a website. No evidence uploader is copyright holder. Polly (Parrot) 02:40, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

--sent in permissions email about both of the photos questioned on this page. thx Redwing2 (talk) 05:49, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Permission OK at OTRS:3354035. Stifle (talk) 14:21, 23 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence uploader is copyright holder, especially given its size, likely from a website or scanned from a book. Polly (Parrot) 02:45, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a promotional image, small image size and lack of meta data makes it likely the uploader isn't the copyright holder. Polly (Parrot) 02:58, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Uploader's claim to copyright of this orphaned book image is invalid. ww2censor (talk) 04:07, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Uploader's claim to copyright of this orphaned book image is invalid. ww2censor (talk) 04:09, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Uploader's claim to copyright of this orphaned book image is invalid. ww2censor (talk) 04:09, 10 July 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 Altenmann (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 09:36, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note to reviewing adminstrator: Please take note that this composite image (own work are considered as derivative work if any of the said images are scanned and pasted together from a copyrighted source such as book, which in this case has a portrait shot of Turghun Almas from his book titled "Uyghurlar" (translated as: The Uyghurs), printed in Almaty by the publisher "Kazakstan" in 1992, Volume 1, in Uyghur, cyrillic script.) is deemed as a blatant copyrights violation because the uploader had not obtained permission from the publisher nor the author for re-use here on Wikipedia. That is all. --Dave1185 (talk) 08:18, 10 July 2009 (UTC) Dave1185 (talk) 08:18, 10 July 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 J Milburn (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 09:36, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a publicity shot... Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:01, 10 July 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 J Milburn (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 09:36, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Magazine cover -> No way this is self Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:02, 10 July 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 J Milburn (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 09:36, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Derivative of magazine cover -> NOT self Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:03, 10 July 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 J Milburn (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 09:36, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possible publicty shot -> Uploader has previous images on PUI Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:06, 10 July 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 J Milburn (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 09:36, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Publicty/Proffesional shot -> Uploader's images previosuly listed at PUI Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:07, 10 July 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 J Milburn (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 09:36, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Publicty/pro-shot - Not self, Uploader has been given final warning over copyright images Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:12, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promo for wrestler - No indication this could be self/unsourced Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:17, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sourced to a magazine. I doubt this image is PD. J Milburn (talk) 11:31, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cropped from a file that is probably non-free. J Milburn (talk) 11:43, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Google Images is not automaticall CC-BY-SA Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:44, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Source website claims copyright on image. J Milburn (talk) 11:45, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Claimed as self , but skeptical given lack of other meta-data Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:46, 10 July 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: Keep - US federal government image of pre-1923 statue Papa November (talk) 12:00, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Source is a deadlink, I'm dubious about this having been published pre-1923. J Milburn (talk) 11:49, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The image is indeed public domain and U.S. government-sourced. I have fixed the source link here and on the image page. IronGargoyle (talk) 15:03, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As indicated, it's a US government image. J Milburn seems to have been fooled by the source site changing the extension of their web page names from htm to cfm. Thanks for the update IronGargoyle. :) Jamesday (talk) 02:28, 4 August 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a publicity shot- web resolution, no meta-data. I suspect this has been taken from elsewhere without permission. J Milburn (talk) 12:16, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Web resolution, no meta-data. I suspect this image has been taken from elsewhere without permission. J Milburn (talk) 12:16, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded with a batch of other suspicious files, apparently a reviewer from a blog site. Web resolution, probably taken from elsewhere without permission. J Milburn (talk) 12:25, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An image that almost certainly came from a website, no meta data, uploader unlikely to be copyright holder. Polly (Parrot) 16:39, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An image that almost certainly came from a website, no meta data, uploader unlikely to be copyright holder Polly (Parrot) 16:40, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promo shot of a band, no evidence uploader holds copyright. Polly (Parrot) 17:03, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Small image size and no meta data means image likely sourced from a website. Polly (Parrot) 17:38, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence the uploader holds copyright, especially given the age of the image. Polly (Parrot) 18:11, 10 July 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 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 as G4 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:09, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Given the small image size and lack of meta data image is likely sourced from a website. Polly (Parrot) 18:14, 10 July 2009 (UTC) This picture is owned by Mr. Mashkevitch and the photographer is ROMAN SPEKTOR —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbakuria (talk • contribs) 20:45, 26 August 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Likely sourced from a website, no evidence uploader holds copyright. Polly (Parrot) 18:18, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Small image size is indicative of being sourced from a website, no evidence the uploader holds copyright. Polly (Parrot) 18:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed as a possible copyvio — this was taken from the Sri Lankan Sunday Times: http://sundaytimes.lk/070408/TV/002tv.html --DeLarge (talk) 08:40, 12 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Small image size and no meta data, image likely sourced from a website or scanned from a book. No evidence uploader holds copyright. Polly (Parrot) 18:44, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image likely sourced from a website or scanned from a book. Polly (Parrot) 18:45, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image likely sourced from a website or scanned from a book. Polly (Parrot) 18:46, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image likely sourced from a website or scanned from a book. Polly (Parrot) 18:46, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Derivative work, uploader does not hold copyright on the album artwork. Polly (Parrot) 19:31, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Derivative work, uploader does not hold copyright on the album artwork. Polly (Parrot) 19:33, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Derivative work, uploader does not hold copyright on the album artwork. Polly (Parrot) 19:33, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Derivative work, uploader does not hold copyright on the album artwork. Polly (Parrot) 19:34, 10 July 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Likely an image sourced from a website given its size. Polly (Parrot) 22:35, 10 July 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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 22:18, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image is likely sourced from a website, small size and no meta data. Polly (Parrot) 22:37, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep this --Prinical65 (talk) 19:03, 14 July 2009 (UTC) — Prinical65 (talk • contribs) very first edits were to make "keep" recommendations in disparate discussions regarding on images uploaded by AimalCool. The user has made few or no other edits outside this purpose.[reply]

Why?   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 19:30, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: It is a derivative image of this website image, which is also on the page the uploader stated was the source http://www.museo8bits.com/anuncios/ss_06c.jpg but with the background removed. Removing the background does not give the uploader a new copyright and unless we can prove it is freely licenced, then it is still copyright and must be deleted. ww2censor (talk) 19:21, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom and ww2censor. User AimalCool (talk · contribs) has attempted to give rights that user does not have, multiple times.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 19:30, 14 July 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: Keep. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 00:58, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NPG sourced imaged - Reffered to PUI because of the issue over NPG images at Commons Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:55, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep because only US law should apply to files stored on English Wikipedia and Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/National Portrait Gallery images (first set) was kept. If Commons changes policy to ignore UK law, these files can be moved to Commons; otherwise, they should be kept here.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 00:53, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep US law applies on en.Wiki, and Corel v. Bridgeman is good and clear law.--Prosfilaes (talk) 02:15, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per US Law...Modernist (talk) 12:17, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per US Law Johnbod (talk) 03:31, 12 July 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: Keep. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 00:58, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NPG sourced image Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:56, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep because only US law should apply to files stored on English Wikipedia and Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/National Portrait Gallery images (first set) was kept. If Commons changes policy to ignore UK law, these files can be moved to Commons; otherwise, they should be kept here.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 00:53, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep US law applies on en.Wiki, and Corel v. Bridgeman is good and clear law.--Prosfilaes (talk) 02:15, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per US Law
• Keep per Corel v. Bridgeman...Modernist (talk) 14:46, 12 July 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: Keep. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 00:58, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NPG sourced image Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:57, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep because only US law should apply to files stored on English Wikipedia and Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/National Portrait Gallery images (first set) was kept. If Commons changes policy to ignore UK law, these files can be moved to Commons; otherwise, they should be kept here.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 00:54, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep US law applies on en.Wiki, and Corel v. Bridgeman is good and clear law.--Prosfilaes (talk) 02:15, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The photographer died in 1918, so it is UK PD, plus, Corel v. Bridgeman. Johnbod (talk) 03:30, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per US Law...Modernist (talk) 14:42, 12 July 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: Keep. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 00:58, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NPG sourced image Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:00, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep because only US law should apply to files stored on English Wikipedia and Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/National Portrait Gallery images (first set) was kept. If Commons changes policy to ignore UK law, these files can be moved to Commons; otherwise, they should be kept here.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 00:54, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep US law applies on en.Wiki, and Corel v. Bridgeman is good and clear law.--Prosfilaes (talk) 02:15, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Did you look at the NPG "source". Obviously not, as it shows a TOTALLY DIFFERENT IMAGE, the painting from which this 18th or 19th century print (certainly not an engraving, perhaps a mezzotint) was made. Johnbod (talk) 03:25, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per above...Modernist (talk) 14:43, 12 July 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: Keep. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 00:58, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NPG Sourced image Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:01, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep because only US law should apply to files stored on English Wikipedia and Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/National Portrait Gallery images (first set) was kept. If Commons changes policy to ignore UK law, these files can be moved to Commons; otherwise, they should be kept here.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 00:54, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep US law applies on en.Wiki, and Corel v. Bridgeman is good and clear law.--Prosfilaes (talk) 02:15, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep this is a reproduction of a print of an original painting. The original (after) Holbein painting remains in Barber Surgeons Hall. See :- At the Sign of the Barber's Pole: Studies In Hirsute History William Andrews (Proj. Gutenberg, 2006) for a similar derivative image. The US law on the matter is applicable - it's also sensible. As an aside, I am happy that you've aired your concerns albeit in a somewhat abbreviated form - but is this not a matter better decided by an over arching policy, rather than overturning an established policy for each and every single image? Kbthompson (talk) 08:06, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, If there is an equivilant image in Guternburg, upload that image and use it instead of an NPG one Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:56, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, why? The quality will be much worse. Johnbod (talk) 03:28, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep basic Corel v. Bridgeman. Johnbod (talk) 03:28, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per US Law...Modernist (talk) 14:44, 12 July 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.