Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files

Blatant copyright violations or images missing source or license information may be "speedied"

If an image is unquestionably copied from another website and no assertion of permission or fair use is made, the image may be speedy deleted under criterion G12. Please tag the image with {{subst:db-copyvio|url=source URL}} and warn the user with {{Nothanks-sd}}.

If an image is missing source or license information, place either:

{{subst:nsd}} for no source

or

{{subst:nld}} for no license

on the image description page to put the image in the appropriate category. After being tagged for 7 days, the image will be eligible for speedy deletion per criterion 4 for images.

Please also notify the uploader so they get a chance to fix the problem(s). The templates {{image source|Image:Image name.ext}} and {{image copyright|Image:Image name.ext}} are made for this purpose, but feel free to write a message of your own. It is not necessary to warn the uploader about every individual image if they have uploaded several such images, but at least one message telling them that images without source/license will be deleted should be given to each user.

Shortcut

[[:|WP:PUI]]

This page is for listing and discussing images that are used under a non-free license or have disputed source or licensing information. Images are listed here for 14 days before they are processed.

Instructions

Before listing, check if the image should be listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems (if its source is known and it cannot be used under a free license or fair use doctrine) or at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion (if it's simply unneeded).

To list an image on this page:

Place one of the following tags on the image description page:
- {{PUIdisputed}} — If the source or copyright status is disputed.
- {{PUInonfree}} — If the image is only available under a non-free license.
Contact the uploader by adding a message to their talk page. You can use {{subst:idw-pui|Image:filename.ext}} (replace filename.ext with the name of the image). If the editor hasn't visited in a while, consider using the "E-mail this user" link.
Add "{{unverifiedimage}}" to the image caption on articles the image is on. This is to attract more attention to the deletion debate to see what should be done.
List the image at the bottom of this page, stating the reasons why the image should be deleted.

Listings should be processed by an administrator after being listed for 14 days. Images that are accepted following this fourteen-day period should have {{subst:puir}} added to the image page and a copy of the issue and/or discussion that took place here put on the image talk page.

Note: Images can be unlisted immediately if they are undisputably in the public domain or licensed under an indisputably free license (GFDL, CC-BY-SA, etc.—see Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for more on these). Images which claim fair use must have two people agree to this.

Holding cell

These images have been listed for at least 14 days. Images which have been determined to be acceptable may be removed from this page.

March 23

Image:Ted kulongoski.jpg See Ticket#: 2006121810023211. "You have permission to distribute the Governor's photo far and wide" is not the same as PD. Kjetil r 02:38, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Attempting to resolve; awaiting return phone call from the Governor's office. Please do not delete pending resolution. -Pete 01:32, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Heard back from Kristina Edmunson from the Governor's office. Received general permission, and emailed her list of licenses to review. -Pete 00:50, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- If it really is "released without restriction by the Governor's office" then it's copyrightfreeuse... so, unless evidence to the contrary I'd say keep it. gren グレン 08:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree with above, but more clarity would certainly be helpful. I just sent a followup email to the Governor's office, which to my knowledge hasn't yet selected a license. Hopefully a specific license will come soon. -Pete 01:46, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The image's public domain status was confirmed (below) by the Governor's Communications office. -Pete 21:22, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  From: Kristina.Edmunson (email deleted for privacy)
  
  Subject: RE: Governor Kulongoski Headshot
  
  Date: April 12, 2007 9:37:16 AM PDT
  
  To: peteforsyth (email deleted for privacy)
  
  Again, I assure you, that this photo is already in the public domain.
  - Could you forward that e-mail to permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org? --Iamunknown 05:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done just now, sorry for the delay, and thanks for the reminder. -Pete 21:29, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Listings

New images should be listed in this section, under today's date. Please be sure to tag the image with an appropriate PUI tag, and notify the uploader.

April 23

Image:Carlos andres perez.jpg - Description of the image indicate it is not work of the US government. --WinHunter ^(talk) 02:34, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:PamelaAaa.jpg - obviously not a US Gov't image. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 03:19, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Ditto for Image:MarcosPérezJiménez.gif, Image:Marcos Pérez Jiménez.gif, and Image:Angarita.jpg all by same user. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 03:24, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - All deleted and uploader blocked indefinitely -- uploaded another, File:2Stallone.jpg, after a final warning. NawlinWiki 02:20, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Diamondcolorj.jpg - User claims PD-self, but it's a scan and appears to be from a book or brochure. User has falsely claimed PD-self on Image:H aviewer.jpg, Image:Sb37-lynch-mckay.jpg, Image:Brad childress23.jpg and Image:Johnson23.JPG. Ytny (talk) 12:36, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The following images also have unverified claims for PD-self:
Image:Knobcreeknightshoot.jpg - Copyright holder only gives permission for use, not for downstream or derivative use. howcheng {chat} 16:21, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Ralphcameron.jpg. The image source shows that this image is owned by the Arizona Historical Society, and thus does not qualify for the public domain as a work of the U.S. Government. A higher resolution image is currently available from commons, and all usage on the English wikipedia has been replaced with the commons image. --Allen3 ^talk 17:00, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Js park.jpg (source). Image tagged as cc-by-2.5, but taken from a Korean fan blog with no image source info. Unable to verify licensing status. --Muchness 17:58, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Image:Choi hong-man.jpg - uploaded by the same user as above, same issue. Ytny (talk) 04:43, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Lauren_jones_for_fiu_fiu.jpg - no indication of release under given license ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 19:26, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:TammySytchAmerica.jpg - no indication of release under given license ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 19:28, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:AD193.jpg - not public domain ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 20:49, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Fsubk.jpg - web resolution, uploaded as first edit of user, could be screenshot of TV commercial for Burger King MECU≈talk 23:57, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

April 24

Image:Office icon.png, Image:Heroes TV icon.png, ~~Image:House Fox icon.png~~ - these are cropped versions of ~~the official logo~~ [title screenshots], and are not free. Additionally, because they were erroneously marked as free they did not show up as violation of fair use policy (in userbox). ALTON .ıl 05:06, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- replaced Image:House Fox icon.png with newly created file
- give me one more week, I will try to fix HokieRNB 20:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Dropdead4.jpg - Source ([1]) does not support license claim. Fritz Saalfeld (Talk) 11:17, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Arch_jean_st_irenee.jpg - Image source [2] claims permission for use on that site. Definitely not PD as tagged. howcheng {chat} 21:58, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Lyen wong wiki.jpg and Image:Lyen wong wiki4.jpg - are listed as being taken by Kolja Platen (aka User:Yellowstone, the uploader), but also have the German Wikipedia mentioned. There (de:Bild:Lyen wong wiki.jpg), the photographer is listed as Claus Willemer. On (de:Bild:Lyen_wong_wiki4.jpg), it mentions that User:Yellowstone is the webmaster of Lyen Wong's website. My impression of this German diff is that there used to be permission for use at http://www.lyenwong.de/wikipedia.html, but the page no longer exists. I have emailed Yellowstone to let them know that these images have been nominated. ~ Bigr Tex 22:03, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yellowstone has reinstated the page at http://www.lyenwong.de/wikipedia.html proving that Kolja Platen/Yellowstone is the webmaster and can release the images. ~ Bigr Tex 15:03, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Pauly_Shore_photo.jpg - screencap of copyrighted content, no sign of release ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 22:48, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Alexander Lukashenko May 2005.jpg - "Free publishing" is not the same as "free for any purpose". --Carnildo 22:54, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- So close, yet so far again. Man, it feels like I cannot get free photos from the CIS. Anywho, as the uploaded, I just speedied this. There is another photo from the above site existing on the article on former Turkmen President Nyazov, but it is placed at the Commons. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 01:35, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Fhyost.jpg - No indication of the date the image was published, the copyright owner or the source; no information given to substantiate the post mortem 100 years claim or even a less restrictive {{PD-US}} claim. Iamunknown 06:20, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Image:Charles_robb.jpg - No source given to verify public domain status Iamunknown 06:21, 25 April 2007 (UTC)~~[reply]
Source given. --Iamunknown 08:08, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Ray_O._Wyland.jpg - No acknowledgement of copyright holder on the image description page or archive.org. Iamunknown 06:25, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Astevenson.jpg - No acknowledgement of copyright holder; link is dead. Iamunknown 06:27, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

April 25

Image:030507-lg.jpg claims own work, but give another source. Unless User:Vissuddi is Jeremy Yuenger it's invalid. // Liftarn
Image:07-03-17-010 - PS3.jpg claims own work, but looks like a promo shot. // Liftarn
Image:2AS.jpg claims own work, but is also available on the page occult.skywatching.net. See also User_talk:Acom#Possibly_unfree_Image:2AS.jpg --Eleassar ^{my talk} 12:01, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The link you provided does not go to the images rather a 404 page. I was around on the day this image was posted and will attest to it being an original work by Acom. In addition there are a large number of convex hull renderings that have been provided by this user under the GPL to help fill in the gaps of our knowledge with artist impressions of the small solar system bodies. I have for the time being remove the disputed image tag which I will restore momentarily until this matter is settled. Abyssoft 15:16, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The Image listed is archive in Google's image search. If you look closely you will see the two images are rather different; in the rendering of the convex hull, The lower right forward quadrant of the archived copy is different from the one posted by Acom. Abyssoft 22:31, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but Acom has violated copyrights more than once and we cannot rely simply on your claim. It would help a lot if Acom provided some detail on how he created that image(s). --Eleassar ^{my talk} 12:45, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Grozny-meshit.jpg -- uploader's claim of this being own work seems unlikely. Jkelly 17:34, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

April 26

Image:Frontman.jpg - uploader claims that the image is copyrighted and the copyright holder has irrevocably released all rights to it. I see no evidence on the website the the copyright holder has irrevocably released rights to it. Royalbroil 01:47, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Sivan Klein.png tagged pd-self, but looks like a screencap to me. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 04:54, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:MelbCitycourt2.jpg - Can't find anything at source to support PD claim. Fritz Saalfeld (Talk) 16:34, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Kojiariyoshi.jpg - Tagged GFDL-self, but uploader is not creator of work (although he did crop it). No indication at source that GFDL applies. howcheng {chat} 21:53, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader here. I was hoping by cropping the picture significantly, that it'd pass as a self-work item. As is, if it doesn't, could it be re-categorized for fair use? ~ (The Rebel At) ~ 23:37, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, given that Ariyoshi is dead, you could make a claim under the WP:EDP, but it's still a non-free image. howcheng {chat} 02:50, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

April 27

Image:Breast_implants.jpg - Titan24 (talk · contribs) claims {{PD-self}} in what seems to be a continuation of other imagevios which have been deleted. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 03:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:HTfront.gif - Uploader claims PD-self but images are copyrighted logos and newspapers. Has been contacted twice on his talk page but unresponsive. WindsorFan 18:17, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I recommend changing permission to {{Non-free newspaper image}} --Eastmain 09:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Kidderminstershuttlefront.gif - Uploader claims PD-self but images are copyrighted logos and newspapers. Has been contacted twice on his talk page but unresponsive. WindsorFan 18:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I recommend changing permission to {{Non-free newspaper image}} --Eastmain 09:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Herefordtimemast.gif - Uploader claims PD-self but images are copyrighted logos and newspapers. Has been contacted twice on his talk page but unresponsive. WindsorFan 18:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I recommend changing permission to {{Non-free newspaper image}} --Eastmain 09:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Wenfront.gif - Uploader claims PD-self but images are copyrighted logos and newspapers. Has been contacted twice on his talk page but unresponsive. WindsorFan 18:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I recommend changing permission to {{Non-free newspaper image}} --Eastmain 09:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Titles worcesternews.gif - Uploader claims PD-self but images are copyrighted logos and newspapers. Has been contacted twice on his talk page but unresponsive. WindsorFan 18:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I recommend changing permission to {{Non-free newspaper image}} --Eastmain 09:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Kidderminstershuttlemast.gif - Uploader claims PD-self but images are copyrighted logos and newspapers. Has been contacted twice on his talk page but unresponsive. WindsorFan 18:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I recommend changing permission to {{Non-free newspaper image}} --Eastmain 09:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Fireflyallianceflag.jpg - Appears to be derivative image from Firefly and non-releaseable into public domain. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 20:09, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Mohammadreza Shah.jpg- A nice picture but unfortunately does not have copyright permission. --Aminz 22:25, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright permission is not required for a fair use claim, and this one is obviously valid. The website where the image was obtained also does not own the copyright to it no matter what it claims. According to Iranian copyright law, unchanged since 1970 according to Template:PDFlink, the term of protection for photography or for any work where it "belongs to a person of legal position" (such as, say, the Shah) is 30 years from the date of publication. See Part III, Article 16. If this photo was made and published before 1977, which IMO is the most likely, it's PD. It would be better if someone could find out when that was, of course, but although it's a very common portrait no one seems to be saying. TCC (talk) (contribs) 01:15, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alternatively we could write to Her Majesty Farah Pahlavi, from whose website the picture was downloaded, and ask Her for permission to use it on a free license. :)) In 3 years it will be PD anyway. --BotevFixer 09:54, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Phamthimaiphuong.jpg, Image:Phan Thu Ngan.jpg, Image:NguyenDieuHoa.jpg, Image:Mai-phuong-thuy.jpg - All uploaded by Fairplayworld and tagged {{PD-self}}, but all from http://vietbao.vn. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 23:24, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

April 28

Image:Arsacidedynasty.jpg claims to be self-created public domain image, but it has been clearly published somewhere and there is no source.--Desafio 16:20, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

April 29

Image:Ian_excel_bigbro.jpg - Copyrighted screenshot claimed as self created. Nv8200p talk 01:34, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:IlanChester.jpg - Looks like a copyrighted news photo. Nv8200p talk 01:48, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Indknt.jpg - No indication that copyright holder has given permission to release under GFDL. Nv8200p talk 02:21, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:RonaldEnroth.PNG - Copyright holder hasn't actually released into the public domain; just given permission to the uploader to scan the book and post it online. howcheng {chat} 02:48, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:05_14_07title.gif - Claims fair use with a GFDL tag. Nv8200p talk 02:53, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:074.JPG - Nintendo screenshot. Doubtful it was licensed under GFDL. Nv8200p talk 02:56, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:075.JPG - Nintendo screenshot. Doubtful it was licensed under GFDL. Nv8200p talk 02:56, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:SanchezWithCoulter-w.jpg - low resolution, web quality, no metadata, unique location that use most likely did not have access to MECU≈talk 14:24, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:SaintLouisSeal.gif - Source states: "Copyright © [St. Louis Board of Public Service]". Not a US Federal Government product. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 00:17, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Rme043.JPG, Image:Rme71.JPG, Image:Rme032.JPG, Image:Rme017.JPG, Image:OLA Spain2007.jpg, Image:OLA Manila2007.jpg and many more images uploaded by Dellquez (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Copyright dubious, as names on photo credits don't match that of the uploader, who asserts being the creator and releasing them to public domain. Tearlach 01:14, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Brats in school.jpg — tagged as being a work of the US government, but it's from a school web site. The source information should be clarified to explain why this is a work of the US government. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 02:18, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tracked that down just now. The image host is off the US DOD servers, the privacy policy page notes that all photos appearing on the site (exept for those created by the children) are released to the public domain as a work of the US Government. You can check if you like to confirm, But I think that this one is ok. TomStar81 (Talk) 02:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The school website is from the Department of Defense---it's a Department of Defense Dependent school. Not public high school like the ones in your local neighborhood.Balloonman 04:56, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for the clarification. I've removed the PUI notices. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 16:30, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:4519.jpg - licensed as promotional, but source is a real estate blog. tiZom_(2¢) 19:12, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Chinapyongyangimjin.jpg - If this is copyrighted, the image is not free use. If this is not copyrighted, we need to know a source to verify it. Komdori 19:54, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Battleofhaengju.jpg - says it was listed here, but it was not; been sitting with "somewebsite" link for several periods. (In this case, image is likely not old enough, and no copyright source specified.) Komdori 19:56, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

April 30

The following images are all licensed for non-commercial educational use only, but have been "grandfathered" since the speedy deletion criteria for such images only apply for images uploaded after 19 May 2005. This does not mean they are excempt from the license policy though, just that they can't be speedily deleted. Hence listing them here, these are all the images tagged with {{Brazilian Olympic Committee Image}}, a template we need to delete as well once these are done. Each of these images must be re-tagged with an apropriate non-free (aka fair use) tag and supplied with a valid fair use rationale or be deleted (or if someone can convince the Brazilian Olymic Comitee to change theyr license practice that would be good too). --Sherool (talk) 23:04, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Koguryo.jpg - claims GFDL, but no evidence of it; linked webpage says used with courtesy, which doesn't seem like free/GFDL. Komdori 23:15, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Cisco.Certified.Network.Associate.Logo.png - claims fair use, but I am requesting a second opinion, preferably from an expert, or from a representative of the owner of the image. Although the use of a low-resolution image of a logo or trademark to illustrate a topic on the non-profit Wikipedia website is generally considered to be fair use, the presence of the CCNA logo on Wikipedia arguably does not really contribute to the public understanding of the subject matter. Wikipedia:fair use says that an image "must contribute significantly to the article" in order for it to comply with Wikipedia policy; furthermore, the logo is protected by both copyright law and trademark law. For these reasons it seems the benefit of keeping the image is minimal as compared with the potential that it could possibly infringe the rights of the owner. 69.140.164.142 04:13, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May 1

Image:Bangles.jpg - tag claims {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} but the source says it's a non-commercial image. MER-C 09:58, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Image:NZ_Stewart_Island.png appears to modified version of a likely copyrighted image. There is no information as to the source of the original map image. --Limegreen 11:44, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]~~

~~The above image was modified by me, original image sourced from [3] Please either remove the notice from the image page or notify me so as I can do so. Thankyou.~~

Happy to accept it's free. It's still redundant with Image:Stewart_Island-Rakiura.png, but that is not an issue for here.--Limegreen 12:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Dublinflag.gif - contradictory license tags. MER-C 12:26, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Cuscatlan flag.png - contradictory license tags. MER-C 12:26, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Flag of Rodrigues.gif - contradictory license tags. MER-C 12:30, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Int-ecwa.gif - contradictory license tags. MER-C 12:30, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Masuimi3.jpg - image appears to be a professionally posed and photographed image. This would generally indicate a non-free image. User who uploaded it has only two contributions, the upload and the edit to the Masuimi Max article. Dismas|^(talk) 13:18, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:50ecko.jpeg Image was taken from www.marceckoenterprises.com, and uploader claims it has been released to the public domain. tiZom_(2¢) 16:34, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Microfiche .jpg - Taken from a website; no evidence that the user runs that site. grendel|khan 18:27, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Microfilmroll.jpg - Taken from a website; no evidence that the user runs that site. grendel|khan 18:27, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Microfilmreader.JPG - Taken from a website; no evidence that the user runs that site. grendel|khan 18:27, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May 2

Image:Campusview.JPG, Image:Campusview2.JPG - I can't find a pixel-for-pixel source for these, but both images appear in a copyrighted tour guide (PDF) of Reading University. Uploading user's other image contributions are mostly or wholly copyvios. — mholland (talk) 10:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May 3

Image:KBSansiattack.jpg - Screenshot of a drama about an event used to describe the event. Komdori 01:00, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:E3 5 4a sassanian.jpg - Seems to be from here [4] rather than its supposed source.
Image:Iranian Woman Parthian Shot.jpg - While it is taken from CAIS, see here[5]. It is probably not fair use, much less GFDL. The Behnam 19:19, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Candaceillusion.gif - Appears to be generated from scenes in Heroes, certainly not {{PD-self}}-qualifying. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 20:06, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While obviously not pd-self the image itself was taken from the Heroes Wiki. Fair use in its entirety. –– Lid^(Talk) 05:17, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images from the City of Thousand Oaks: These are not works of the U.S. federal government (as tagged. howcheng {chat} 00:19, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May 4

Image:Goblu.jpg is clearly stated to be a map produced by the U.S. state of Michigan in the article it illustrates (Goblu and Beatosu), but is incorrectly labeled as US Govt work (and hence a free license) which it is not. Ruhrfisch 11:32, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. So what would be the correct nomenclature? RMc 12:46, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:MN00623A.jpg claims to be a U.S. Government work, while the subject matter clearly is a British driving licence, so it's either Crown Copyright or non-free (not sure whether the UK licence design is subject to copyright). doco (☏) 12:25, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:905887624.jpg claims to be GNU self license, which is highly unlikely. Clearly a professional promo/ad photo with copyright of some sort.
Image:Martyfriedman420.jpg same as previous image, but smaller. Same reason. Also, ending number is a refernce to 4:20, which is highly irrelevant (this point is maybe irrelevant in this discussion also, I don't know).
Image:Johnmckenziegoal.jpeg marked as GFDL-self, but appears to be a photograph of a photograph. Ytny (talk) 14:23, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Sarge.GIF is tagged with a free license even though it is clearly a screenshot of a copyrighted TV show. - Super48 19:15, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:345931770_l.jpg - this image appears to be a non-free image and not the PD-self it is tagged with User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 22:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May 5

Image:Gorerage.jpg - No evidence that this is a USGov image at all. Taken from a non-USGov website that does not claim it is a USGov image. --Tom (talk - email) 00:36, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Zubiri.jpg - Tagged with {{PD-Philippines}}, which discusses old works, but makes no mention of government works. BigDT 05:32, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Curtis-Bush.jpg - This appears to be a scan from a newspaper or magazine User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 12:34, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Eastern European Hedgehog.jpg seems to be the restult of a sloppy transwiki job. The image may well be free licensed, unfortunately the only source info provided is "Lithuanian version of Wikipedia" but despite my best efforts I can find no such image there. None of the articles that use the image have links to any lithuanian version. Commons have a copy of the image, but it was copied from us, not ltWiki, so long storry short: We have no idea who took this photo or what license they released it under. Unless anyone can track down the original image on ltWiki this should be deleted as unverifiable. --Sherool (talk) 16:53, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Czartoryski Wlodzimierz.jpg - I don't believe that this old, black-and-white image was originally photographed by the uploader. Licence tag has changed since original (deleted) upload too. ❛ʀϵɒv϶ʁƨ❜ 20:36, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Czartoryski Pawel.jpg - I don't believe that this image was originally photographed by the uploader. Licence tag has changed since original (deleted) upload too. ❛ʀϵɒv϶ʁƨ❜ 20:36, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Oklahoma City2.jpg - The image is tagged {{GFDL-no-disclaimers}} but is identical to the photo [6] used to advertise Oklahoma City’s 29 December 2006 "Party Gras." --Kralizec! (talk) 03:51, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Coloripodshuffles.jpg - not from a press kit Secretlondon 08:14, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May 6

Image:RobinsonBear.JPG is tagged as {{PD-self}} even though it is clearly a screenshot of copyrighted game. - Super48 16:11, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:CWMcD1997.jpg and Image:CWMcD+SheepDolly.jpg have been uploaded as GFDL by the copyright holder, but with the proviso that "The image may be used as long as the name and reputation of Capers W. McDonald are treated with respect. The image's inclusion on Wikipedia will not result in financial loss to any copyright holder." This is incompatible with the GFDL licence. --kingboyk 22:24, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Anuj_smart.jpg - Looks like a promo photo, probably not free BigDT 22:25, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:OctopusNAS1.jpg Image taken from [7], i.e. the Thinkquest website. Well, they are a website for student essays, not the source of the picture. Dr Zak 00:54, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is an example of Nazi propaganda, dated around 1938. [8] We don't claim it as a free image, but as an historic poster, so I'm unclear about the point of this entry. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:00, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's from the Library of Congress, according to this source, [9] which says "Antisemitic cartoon by Seppla (Josef Plank)--An octopus with a Star of David over its head has its tentacles encompassing a globe. Credit: Library of Congress, courtesy of USHMM Photo Archives. Date: Circa 1938" SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:04, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, and suddenly it's more credible. Dr Zak 01:06, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps in future, you could take a quick look on Google before tagging images for deletion. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:09, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps even you can properly source and credit images when you upload them. Dr Zak 01:16, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More info from the Library of Congress. [10] SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:09, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some aspects of human history would make some people feel uncomfortable. WP has many historic political posters, I don't see any problem with this one. Doesn't seem like a good faith nomination. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 01:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Pbpic907668.jpg is tagged as PD-self, however it clearly has a website logo on it. Also uploader claims that because it was on display at an event it is public domain. Personally, I'm not convinced of that statement. -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 02:25, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:DerSturmer stand.jpg. Picture of a Stürmerkasten. Source given are two websites, none of which tell who the photographer might be or what archive this might have come from. Dr Zak 03:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Humus sapiens questions Dr Zak's attempt to delete a Nazi image above, so now Dr Zak has found a Nazi image uploaded by Humus sapiens' to nominate for deletion. This isn't the first time he's done this. These are probably PD images, but for our purposes are labeled non-free historical images; and we're using them for educational purposes, not simply to illustrate pages for frivolous reasons. If you want to help track down the original source or the author, Dr Zak, please do; the help would be welcome. But please stop the vindictive WP:POINTs. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 04:34, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can we now get back to discussing the image, please?! When you have nothing to say about the issue you have a go at the contributor instead, and others have observed that as well. Dr Zak 04:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, and another thing: it's not my fault that stuff from That Era hasn't fallen out of copyright yet. By the way, the Stiftung Preußischer Kulturbesitz [11] has a couple Stürmerkāsten online. All of them watermarked unfortunately; if they hadn't been, I'd have uploaded one myself. Dr Zak 04:57, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]