Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2013 March 8

< March 7	March 9 >

March 8

File:Cricket-world-cup-1975.jpg

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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:04, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cricket-world-cup-1975.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

I really doubt that scientificthinkers.wikidot.com took this image; it is professional quality, and they have images spanning several decades. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 00:45, 8 March 2013 (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:Homoarginine production reaction and mechanism.gif

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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:04, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Homoarginine production reaction and mechanism.gif (delete | talk | history | logs).

I cannot find any statement on a CC license in the source page. Leyo 01:42, 8 March 2013 (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:Homoarginine Production.gif

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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:04, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Homoarginine Production.gif (delete | talk | history | logs).

I cannot find any statement on a CC license in the source page. Leyo 01:43, 8 March 2013 (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:PrincessMahsuri (FlashFlyGuy - Flickr).jpg

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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:05, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:PrincessMahsuri (FlashFlyGuy - Flickr).jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

The image description page contains a copy/paste of an email in which the copyright holder gave permission to use the image on Wikipedia. He did not grant any sort of viral permission. Either someone needs to reach out to him and see if he would consent to an appropriate permission or the image needs to be deleted. B (talk) 04:08, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, the Flickr user's e-mail appears to be unlicensed. The quote might be covered by fair use, but non-free content isn't permitted on file information pages per WP:NFCC#9. --Stefan2 (talk) 23:37, 8 March 2013 (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:Precinct of Mut avenue 004.jpg

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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:05, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Precinct of Mut avenue 004.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

The uploader added the restrictions that the image can only be used if "reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context". Licenses that prohibit derivative works are not permitted on Wikipedia. B (talk) 04:11, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also File:Precinct of Mut 005.jpg, File:Precinct of Mut 003.jpg, and File:Precinct of Mut 001.jpg. --B (talk) 04:14, 8 March 2013 (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:RepTal Flag sm.gif

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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:05, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:RepTal Flag sm.gif (delete | talk | history | logs).

Orphaned, no evidence of permission (if it's even copyrightable) B (talk) 04:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Probably not copyrightable, but File:Flag of the Republic of Talossa.svg is much better. --Stefan2 (talk) 23:39, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Closing admin comment: I am deleting, though the file may not be un-free, as it is unused and we have a better image in the preferred svg format on the Commons. -- Dianna (talk) 05:09, 16 March 2013 (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:WhipJones.jpg

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: Hearing no objection or defense of this image being free, converted to fair use. Obviously, please feel free to nominate at IFD if desired. --B (talk) 21:10, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Description page is confused about whether this image is licensed or fair use. It could possibly be considered for use under a claim of fair use as the subject is deceased, but the licensing claim is almost certainly incorrect. B (talk) 04:43, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete:There's also contradictory information about the provenance of the photo. They say it's a stock publicity photo, but they also say it's a personal family photo. I was unable to find any copies on the web that pre-date the upload, and thus there's no proof of prior publication, which is a requirement for us to keep the file for fair use. -- Dianna (talk) 16:01, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I looked again and found it at http://www.skimuseum.net/halloffame/hall_of_fame_details.php?HallOfFameID=133 and http://www.aspenhalloffame.org/whip_jones.html. It seems reasonable that this probably was a publicity photo (one of the uploader's claims) ... so I'll switch it to fair use. --B (talk) 21:05, 10 April 2013 (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:Aswnitsri80.jpg

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 Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:06, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aswnitsri80.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

In order to host this file, we need to know the provenance and copyright status of each image in the montage. There's probably multiple photographers' work here and we don't appear to have permission from any of them. Dianna (talk) 04:55, 8 March 2013 (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:Nursepin1.jpg

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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:05, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nursepin1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

The badge design is copyrighted, so this is a derivative work; the underlying design is still copyrighted; this is a copyvio Russavia ^{ლ(ಠ益ಠლ)} 07:07, 8 March 2013 (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:CaesarsPoker.jpg

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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:05, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

The card designs, the logos, etc are all copyrighted, so this derivative work is a copyvio Russavia ^{ლ(ಠ益ಠლ)} 07:09, 8 March 2013 (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:175px-Chewing-coca.jpg

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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:05, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:175px-Chewing-coca.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

The email permission appears to only be valid for Wikipedia use -- it doesn't say anything about commercial, derivatives, etc Russavia ^{ლ(ಠ益ಠლ)} 07:09, 8 March 2013 (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:Crossair-hb-akk.jpg

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: re-tagged as Speedy Deletion candidate. Dianna (talk) 05:19, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Crossair-hb-akk.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

This fails WP:NFCC, in that we don't need to have a photo of the exact aircraft in operation. Commons:Category:Crossair has plenty of Crossair Saab 340 photos which we can replace it with. Russavia ^{ლ(ಠ益ಠლ)} 07:11, 8 March 2013 (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 ⚡ 08:06, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am tagging for Speedy F7. -- Dianna (talk) 05:19, 16 March 2013 (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:Tls0608.jpg

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, with the addition of a fair use rationale. Dianna (talk) 15:52, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tls0608.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

I don't see anything on the newspaper's website or in our article that indicates that they use a Creative Commons license. Should probably be retagged as fair use and an appropriate rationale written. B (talk) 14:27, 8 March 2013 (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:Jsjenks-mosaic.jpg

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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:05, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jsjenks-mosaic.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Mural of unknown age in the United States. Stefan2 (talk) 23:32, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's not old enough to be public domain. Staib (talk) 01:53, 9 March 2013 (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 from Mough

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: All deleted. Dianna (talk) 02:00, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mough (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

File:Arw29.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs). - image contains a logo for "Fiannóglach"

File:Fiannóglach an Airm (shoulder tab insignia).jpg (delete | talk | history | logs). - a shoulder patch that says "Fiannóglach". Even if the user scanned it in, to the extent that it is copyrightable, the original creator would still own the copyright (although it may not be copyrightable as the patch only depicts text and a border

File:Arw23.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs). - image contains a logo for "Fiannóglach"

File:Arw13.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs). - no exif data, from googling, I found it here dated 2005 (direct image URL) - it was uploaded to Wikipedia in 2006.

File:ENHANCED COMBAT HELMET.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs). - exif data for a Nilon D100, says it was taken May 12, 2004 - image stolen from http://www.defence.gov.au/news/armynews/editions/1097/topstories/story01.htm (article dated May 20, 2004) and uploaded to Wikipedia in 2006

File:Irish ab139a.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs). - Google Images says that a larger version of the image is used in this August 2006 message board thread (I don't see it on there, but you may have to be logged in to see it). The message board thread is from a few days after it was uploaded here - unlikely it would have been copied from here.

File:Arw End of selection cse..jpg (delete | talk | history | logs). - obviously scanned in from a magazine

File:NZSAS1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs). - EXIF data says Canon PowerShot G1. I can't find an original source for this one, but given that all of the others are obvious copyvios ...

File:Scanned photos 023.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs). - obviously scanned in from a magazine

File:Scanned photos 024.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs). - obviously scanned in from a magazine

File:Scanned photos 025.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs). - obviously scanned in from a magazine

File:Scanned photos 026.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs). - obviously scanned in from a magazine

File:ELROB logo.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs). - obviously a logo

File:Uksf.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs). - EXIF data says Canon Digital IXUS 40. I can't find an original source for this one, but given that all of the others are obvious copyvios ...

File:Uksf 20.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs). - EXIF data says FinePixS7000 (a very nice camera for the price in its day). I can't find an original source for this one, but given that all of the others are obvious copyvios ...

These images come from a variety of different sources. A couple of them are obviously magazine scans. One is a logo. Two of them have logos embedded in the image. Some lack exif data and others have exif data for different cameras. I don't believe we can take the claim of authorship at face value when so many of the images are obviously not from this user. --B (talk) 23:50, 8 March 2013 (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:Med Faithfol Serv NPA mr-B.pdf

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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:04, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Med Faithfol Serv NPA mr-B.pdf (delete | talk | history | logs).

Invalid licence claim. The copyright doesn't go away only because East Germany ceases to exist. All property of East Germany was as far as I am aware transferred to West Germany. Besides, the copyright holder might be the artist instead of the government. Stefan2 (talk) 23:54, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I see that the uploader has changed the licence to {{PD-GermanGov}}. However, {{PD-GermanGov}} tells that it is in the public domain because of § 5 Abs.1 UrhG. According to Commons:Commons:WikiProject Public Domain/German stamps review, § 5 Abs. 1 UrhG only covers text. This is obviously not text. --Stefan2 (talk) 07:54, 19 March 2013 (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:Dist Mil-Pilot GDR med.pdf

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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:04, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dist Mil-Pilot GDR med.pdf (delete | talk | history | logs).

Invalid licence claim. The copyright doesn't go away only because East Germany ceases to exist. All property of East Germany was as far as I am aware transferred to West Germany. Besides, the copyright holder might be the artist instead of the government. Stefan2 (talk) 23:54, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - now licenced as PD-German-Gov, which for a military award I believe is the correct licensing. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:57, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- {{PD-GermanGov}} tells that it is in the public domain because of § 5 Abs.1 UrhG. However, according to Commons:Commons:WikiProject Public Domain/German stamps review, § 5 Abs. 1 UrhG only covers text. This is obviously not text. --Stefan2 (talk) 07:54, 19 March 2013 (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:Med BHiA mr-B.pdf

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 DeltaQuad (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:16, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Med BHiA mr-B.pdf (delete | talk | history | logs).

Invalid licence claim. The copyright doesn't go away only because East Germany ceases to exist. All property of East Germany was as far as I am aware transferred to West Germany. Besides, the copyright holder might be the artist instead of the government. Stefan2 (talk) 23:55, 8 March 2013 (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:Med Merit NPA mr-B.pdf

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 DeltaQuad (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:16, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Med Merit NPA mr-B.pdf (delete | talk | history | logs).

Invalid licence claim. The copyright doesn't go away only because East Germany ceases to exist. All property of East Germany was as far as I am aware transferred to West Germany. Besides, the copyright holder might be the artist instead of the government. Stefan2 (talk) 23:56, 8 March 2013 (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.