Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2008 September 24
September 24
[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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:57, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No evidence for license. Source appears to be a CSI fan site, probably not the copyright holder. dave pape (talk) 00:43, 24 September 2008 (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 I10 by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:57, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This work was made by a private individual and filed with the federal government. "Public documents" are not public domain, indeed the right to create derivative works and commercial use are not granted, just the right to reproduce. -Nard 01:25, 24 September 2008 (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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:57, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Uploader claims {{PD-old-50}}, but I'm not sure how this could be determined. Photo appears in Ted Morgan's book Literary Outlaw, which in turn credits the Ginsberg Deposit at Columbia University. We would need the name of the photographer and/or the date the photo was taken to be able to tag this as {{PD-old-50}}. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 02:04, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Since the US doesn't use 50-years-pma, it's unlikely that that license will apply in any event. We need data on its publication. If Morgan's 1988 book is the first publication, then its copyrighted until at least 2047. --dave pape (talk) 02:15, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- However as the individual has been deceased since the early 1950s, it is unlikely that any fair use image of her is replaceable. 23skidoo (talk) 18:17, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Good point, I had failed to consider that. (Obviously a different license should apply.) -- Gyrofrog (talk) 22:37, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- However as the individual has been deceased since the early 1950s, it is unlikely that any fair use image of her is replaceable. 23skidoo (talk) 18:17, 24 September 2008 (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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:57, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
While it's true that the source site claims all its photos are public domain, from looking at the number of professional publicity photos there, I doubt that the site operator actually understands copyright. dave pape (talk) 02:04, 24 September 2008 (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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:57, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
CC license doubtful - "may not be used without the express written permission of the copyright holder" (in the second upload summary) does not fit with a free license. dave pape (talk) 02:20, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK> Help me out her. I am the Chief Executive Officer of the estate of Allan Houser and manage the copyright on behalf of his widow. I uploaded this image and the image and the sculpture are all copyright Mrs. Houser. How should I designate the image. I don't want people to be able to download it and use it which is why I put that statement in the upload summary. Please help us out here. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by UKRefugee (talk • contribs) 23:06, 25 November 2008 (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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:57, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"may not be used without the express written permission of the copyright holder" contradicts CC license dave pape (talk) 02:25, 24 September 2008 (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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:57, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"permission for the photo to be posted on Wikipedia" is not the same as public domain dave pape (talk) 02:28, 24 September 2008 (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.
Images by User:Noncorporeal
[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 discussion was: Deleted-FASTILY (TALK) 01:59, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Image:Corso reads london.jpg
- Image:Ginsberg and Corso at poetry reading.jpg
- Image:Kerouac and Corso at poetry reading.jpg
Noncorporeal (talk · contribs) had uploaded Image:Gregory Corso Tangiers 1.jpg and claimed to own the image (i.e. CC-BY-SA-3.0). That image was a cropped version of a photo appearing in Ted Morgan's Literary Outlaw (which itself credited the Ginsberg Deposit at Columbia University) and, as such, was a CSD. This leads me to strongly doubt Noncorporeal's claim of ownership for the other Gregory Corso images that s/he has uploaded. They are evidently culled from different sources (as opposed to looking like photographic prints); "Kerouac and Corso at poetry reading.jpg" in particular shows halftone as though it were copied from a book or newspaper. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 02:37, 24 September 2008 (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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:57, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
most likely copyvio from http://www.stroberts.in/; don't see exact URL but Image:SRS.gif and Image:SRS1.gif from same user same time are obvious copyvio, owner url cropped from both XLerate (talk) 06:00, 24 September 2008 (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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:57, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The uploader states on is talk page that this image needs attribution, and tried to add it (attribution) several times to the article. I've asked him for clarification several times, but none has been forthcoming. The attribution is "Photograph of Count Mattei: Courtesy: Archivio Museo Cesare Mattei O.N.L.U.S.Via Nazionale 117, Riola (Bologna), ITALY". Verbal chat 07:15, 24 September 2008 (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) 02:00, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Unclear status. Image has "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0", but also tagged as "copyrighted and unlicensed...". Clarification is needed as to copyright status. Cirt (talk) 23:08, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Ooops. When I uploaded this a while ago (I practically forgot) I must've accidentally tagged it as Creative commons. I removed that tag. Your friend Eddy O. D. Wiki[citation needed] 23:28, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Y Kept - valid fair use claim. Stifle (talk) 13:10, 22 October 2008 (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. AnomieBOT⚡ 01:57, 25 February 2012 (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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:57, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No evidence permission was given to use image under the GFDL. Nv8200p talk 23:53, 24 September 2008 (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.