Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 October 3: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 22:18, 5 October 2009

< October 2	October 4 >

October 3

File:11 Brigade Insignia.gif

Australian military insignia, no source given, if legit, uploader would not be (c) holder, if not legit, no need for unofficial images here Skier Dude (talk) 03:25, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As the brigade was formed in 1916, this would be expired crown copyright. IronGargoyle (talk) 23:25, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Egyptian currency - clearly not PD - should probably be {{non-free currency}} but listing here for additional comment by those more familiar w/foreign currency Skier Dude (talk) 03:37, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:50 EGP obverse.JPG

Egyptian currency - clearly not PD - should probably be {{non-free currency}} but listing here for additional comment by those more familiar w/foreign currency Skier Dude (talk) 03:37, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:50-50-MacedonianLogo.jpg

Orphaned corporate/TV logo, no source given, if legit, uploader would not be (c) holder, if not legit, no need for unofficial images here Skier Dude (talk) 03:39, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:5link3Dtop1.gif

watermarked as (c) Simionescu 2006; no indication uploader is (c) holder Skier Dude (talk) 03:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:5link3Drear1.gif

watermarked (c) PA Simionescu 2006; no indication uploader is (c) holder Skier Dude (talk) 03:42, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:AMS Logo.jpg

Association logo, no source given, if legit, uploader would not be (c) holder, if not legit, no need for unofficial images here Skier Dude (talk) 03:54, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Operation-Mar-Lewe-Part-1.ogv

This is a work of NATO, not the US government, therefore the license is incorrect. Works produced by NATO are under copyright by default and cannot be assumed to be public domain or freely usable unless explicitly stated. Hux (talk) 05:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide a reference to this NATO copyright that you refer to that is specifically applicable to NATO videos. I could not find any copyright on NATO videos. The most restrictive NATO publications still allow use for non-commercial purposes as long as NATO is acknowledged as the source. The U.S. government license still appears to be correct unless you provide documentation to the contrary. http://www.nato.int/docu/review/2009/COPYRIGHT/EN/index.htm Citizen-of-wiki (talk) 02:21, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How can the US government licence be correct if it's a NATO video? Regardless of whether it's copyrighted, surely the licence is wrong. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:18, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Operation-Mar-Lewe-Part-2.ogv

This is a work of NATO, not the US government, therefore the license is incorrect. Works produced by NATO are under copyright by default and cannot be assumed to be public domain or freely usable unless explicitly stated. Hux (talk) 05:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide a reference to this NATO copyright that you refer to that is specifically applicable to NATO videos. I could not find any copyright on NATO videos. The most restrictive NATO publications still allow use for non-commercial purposes as long as NATO is acknowledged as the source. The U.S. government license still appears to be correct unless you provide documentation to the contrary. http://www.nato.int/docu/review/2009/COPYRIGHT/EN/index.htm Citizen-of-wiki (talk) 02:21, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Operation-Mar-Lewe-Part-3.ogv

This is a work of NATO, not the US government, therefore the license is incorrect. Works produced by NATO are under copyright by default and cannot be assumed to be public domain or freely usable unless explicitly stated. Hux (talk) 05:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide a reference to this NATO copyright that you refer to that is specifically applicable to NATO videos. I could not find any copyright on NATO videos. The most restrictive NATO publications still allow use for non-commercial purposes as long as NATO is acknowledged as the source. The U.S. government license still appears to be correct unless you provide documentation to the contrary. http://www.nato.int/docu/review/2009/COPYRIGHT/EN/index.htm Citizen-of-wiki (talk) 02:21, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pomnik Kazimierz Pulaski.jpg

Looks like a scan of a newspaper photo, and no source information has been provided. --El on ka 05:46, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ziauddin Khatib-Three Times Kickboxing Champion.jpg

orphaned, appears to be publicity shot - uploader repeat (c) mis-stater Skier Dude (talk) 05:52, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Y-dylluan-wen-clawr.jpg

novel cover licensed as CC3.0, no proof that uploader is (c) holder or released as CC Skier Dude (talk) 05:59, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:YOTN VII Logo.png

Corporate/conference logo, no source given, if legit, uploader would not be (c) holder, if not legit, no need for unofficial images here Skier Dude (talk) 06:01, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:YOTN6 black.jpg

orphaned Corporate/conference logo, no source given, if legit, uploader would not be (c) holder, if not legit, no need for unofficial images here Skier Dude (talk) 06:02, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:YOTN6.jpg

orphaned Corporate/conference logo, no source given, if legit, uploader would not be (c) holder, if not legit, no need for unofficial images here Skier Dude (talk) 06:02, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Yangu.jpg

album cover; no indication uploader is (c) holder or it was CC released Skier Dude (talk) 06:06, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Yinfree3.jpg

album cover; no indication uploader is (c) holder or it was CC released Skier Dude (talk) 06:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Passion2.jpg

album cover; no indication uploader is (c) holder or it was CC released Skier Dude (talk) 06:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Yanni3.jpg

no source or metadata, appears to be professional headshot Skier Dude (talk) 06:13, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Yazdanian in 2000.jpg

watermarked as "pablo studio", no indication uploader is (c) holder or image released in CC Skier Dude (talk) 06:15, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ygoiwiki.jpg

orphaned group logo, no source given, if legit, uploader would not be (c) holder, if not legit, no need for unofficial images here Skier Dude (talk) 06:18, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:YuliaTymoshenko.jpg

no source or metadata, appears to be screenshot or official photo Skier Dude (talk) 06:26, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mawha series related.

File:Witch_hunter_01.jpg
The cover of the published manwha Witch Hunter is a copyrighted work of the publisher Daiwon C.I. and artist Jung-man Cho and that has not been released to the public domain. To be more accurate this is the French edition first volume cover. Would be acceptable file under fair use with the proper rationales --KrebMarkt 10:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tasha_Godspell.jpg
Promotional material of the same copyrighted work mentioned just above and that has not been released to the public domain.KrebMarkt 09:49, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Team Tasha.jpg
File:Team_Blondie.jpg‎
File:Team_GM.jpg
File:Team BM.jpg
Extracts from the same copyrighted work and to make the thing worse it's from a non-legal scanlation as there is no English licensor. They won't be acceptable images even under fair use licensing. --KrebMarkt 10:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ross Newell crop.jpg

No source and no evidence of permission (a cropped version of a previously deleted file). Memphisto (talk) 10:45, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Amman Towers.jpg

compilation of seven pictures, none of them sourced Skier Dude (talk) 19:44, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mario Thinking About You.jpg

album cover - unlikely uploader is (c) holder Skier Dude (talk) 20:07, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Xblnpreview.jpg

orphaned, screenshot, unlikely uploader is (c) holder Skier Dude (talk) 21:10, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wwtbam-studio.PNG

screenshot - unlikely uploader is (c) holder Skier Dude (talk) 21:30, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wow (Kylie Minogue single).jpg

Album cover, no source, highly unlikely uploader is (c) holder Skier Dude (talk) 21:37, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Woollard.jpg

possibly PD-old, but w/ no source, unable to confirm Skier Dude (talk) 21:40, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader has given additional information, but given the date (1925) {{pd-old}} still may not apply. Skier Dude (talk) 18:41, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wooley.jpg

no metadata, no source, uploader has history of questionable uploads Skier Dude (talk) 21:42, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wongyanlam.jpg

photoshopped old image, no source, therefore (c) claim can't be verified Skier Dude (talk) 21:44, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WRONG! As I explained in the article's talk page and several other places, this image has been public domain since 1920's because he is public figure. I appreciate the enthusiasm, but you seem to have over looked "details" in tagging files, especially the one I own and CREATED 03:04, 5 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nysanda (talk • contribs)

This item still has no source - "Public domain" is not a source. Although the uploader may have photoshopped the image, where did it come from? Skier Dude (talk) 04:10, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, it's tagged as PD-self, which probably is incorrect for an image that may be PD. Skier Dude (talk) 04:14, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A picture that has appeared in many books (5 I can count without looking up /thinking about), many web pages and has been in circulation since 1920 shouldn't be deleted under these conditions. Despite your claims, you seem to be randomly tagging things in ways that are not applicable 04:47, 5 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nysanda (talk • contribs)

Still, there is still no source; which of the 5 books - just give one of them; which of the "many web pages" (specifically the one that holds the (c) for the image - just give one of them. And still, the PD-author is on the page, which is incorrect. Skier Dude (talk) 18:34, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here are a few of the web sites you can find the image on http://www.lionsroarkungfu.com/tony_galvin_gallery_10.htm,

http://www.tibetlamakungfu.com/index.html, www.lamamartialart.com.au/Masters/LamaMasters.htm, http://www.liuhopafa.com/lama.htm

The books include "intelligent sword play of the lamaist school" self published by Lo Wai Keung in Hong Kong, "Yau Jih Baat Gihk Kuen" (Chinese language martial art book) also published by Lo Wai Keung, and "Tibetan Kung Fu" by Michael Staples (unique publications, 1978) Nysanda (talk) 19:06, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not the image creator, indeed I have also left questions regarding this image at both the creator's talk page and at the talk page of the article where it's used. That aside, I don't think it's a school logo at all: it appears to be the traditional arms of the City of Oxford (as opposed to the stylised logo used nowadays, see File:Oxford City Council.jpg below), albeit with sufficient errors to suggest that it's self-drawn, and not scanned. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:59, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 32: / Line 32: @@
 This is a work of NATO, not the US government, therefore the license is incorrect. Works produced by NATO are under copyright by default and cannot be assumed to be public domain or freely usable unless explicitly stated. [[User:Hux|Hux]] ([[User talk:Hux|talk]]) 05:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 :Please provide a reference to this NATO copyright that you refer to that is specifically applicable to NATO videos. I could not find any copyright on NATO videos. The most restrictive NATO publications still allow use for non-commercial purposes as long as NATO is acknowledged as the source. The U.S. government license still appears to be correct unless you provide documentation to the contrary. http://www.nato.int/docu/review/2009/COPYRIGHT/EN/index.htm [[User:Citizen-of-wiki|Citizen-of-wiki]] ([[User talk:Citizen-of-wiki|talk]]) 02:21, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
+::How can the US government licence be correct if it's a NATO video? Regardless of whether it's copyrighted, surely the licence is wrong. [[User:Cordless Larry|Cordless Larry]] ([[User talk:Cordless Larry|talk]]) 22:18, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 ==== [[:File:Operation-Mar-Lewe-Part-2.ogv]] ====