Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 October 15

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 licensed under fair use. — ξ^xplicit 01:00, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Valleyarm.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• corporate logo; no source; unlikely uploader is (c) holder Skier Dude (talk 07:09, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Agree that the claimed license status is improbable. Suggest deletion. Thparkth (talk) 00:13, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright holder is Valleyarm/uploader. What should the file type be listed as?Paigexc (talk) 05:38, 18 October 2010 (UTC)Paigexc[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 (de minimis). Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:01, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Conkyubuntu.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Originally tagged as free, then tagged as non-free, and subsequently tagged for speedy deletion for missing a rationale. However, as the Firefox logo is small in comparison to the whole, this seems to be a borderline case, so I've declined the speedy, and brought it here for discussion. PhilKnight (talk) 14:12, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Classic de minimis. Use of copyrighted logos is incidental and trivial. Thparkth (talk) 00:22, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• That's what I thought, but wasn't a 100% sure. Thanks for explaining. PhilKnight (talk) 14:13, 17 October 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⚡ 02:13, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Loko sofia kit 2010 11.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Football kit, doubt uploader is the copyright holder. Acather96 (talk) 17:48, 15 October 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⚡ 02:13, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kaliakra kit 2010 11.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

• See above Acather96 (talk) 17:49, 15 October 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⚡ 02:13, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Levski sofia kit 2010 11.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

• See above. Acather96 (talk) 17:49, 15 October 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⚡ 02:13, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:CSKA sofia kit 2010 11.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

• See above. Acather96 (talk) 17:50, 15 October 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⚡ 02:13, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pirin kit 2010 11.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

• See above Acather96 (talk) 17:51, 15 October 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⚡ 02:13, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chernomoretz kit 2010 11.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

• See above. Acather96 (talk) 17:52, 15 October 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⚡ 02:13, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Litex lovech home kit 2010 11.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

• See above. Acather96 (talk) 17:52, 15 October 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⚡ 02:13, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tames-iulian.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• No metadata and image exact size appears on [1] so probably not the work of the uploader MilborneOne (talk) 18:44, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• The gsp.ro copy is higher quality while the WP copy is overcompressed and has significant artifacts not present in the gsp.ro version. So it is impossible that gsp.ro used the WP image. This appears to be a professional and commercially-valuable image. It is extremely unlikely that the uploader is the copyright holder. Suggest deletion. Thparkth (talk) 00:34, 16 October 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⚡ 02:13, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:IDB Jeddah.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Image appears in a 2009 blog [2] before image was uploaded to wikipedia - on image arabic caption is not in uploaded image, possibly not the work of the uploader MilborneOne (talk) 21:35, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Tineye suggests this image is used in a few places on the web, and that this image is a crop of a larger version - specifically cropped to remove a copyright notice. This looks like a professional publicity photograph and it is almost certainly unfree. Thparkth (talk) 00:49, 16 October 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⚡ 02:13, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sabic HQ.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:Ras Tanura01.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:Ras Tanura03.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:Ras Tanura04.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:Ras Tanura06.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:Ras Tanura07.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:Ras Tanura10.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:Tarout-castle.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:Saudi Navy Hitteen 616.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:Saudi Navy 2Hitteen 616.jpg.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• User has uploaded copyright violations - no reason to believe these are self made MilborneOne (talk) 22:21, 15 October 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.