Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2012 February 21
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
February 21
[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⚡ 06:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Permission links to site where Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License is not mentioned, my email was ignored Bulwersator (talk) 10:56, 21 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 06:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- File:PYS Tariq Imran 2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- This has a dubious source ("This is a Public image of the Pir Syed Yaqoob Shah i have this image cince long time back but still all the copyrights belong to Pir Syed Yaqoob shah's family Thanks"). It seems that it was previously deleted as F4: File:Pir Syed Mohammad Yaqoob Shah by Tariq Imran 1.jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 15:43, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- By the way, the other uploads at Special:ListFiles/Tariq.Imran should probably be checked. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:48, 21 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 06:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- File:SalakaySalilingMling.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).
- How can the person on the photo be unknown to the uploader if the photo is own work by the uploader? Stefan2 (talk) 16:13, 21 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:04, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Dubious own work: no EXIF, web resolution and lots of copyright-related notices on the uploader's talk page. Stefan2 (talk) 16:14, 21 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:04, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Lolad.jpeg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Dubious own work. Stefan2 (talk) 16:14, 21 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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 13:10, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- File:AMU LOGO.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Dubious {{PD-ineligible}}. Stefan2 (talk) 16:20, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note File:ALMU-logo.jpg at commons, tagged as {{PD-Pakistan}}. This seems like a better version. --Muhandes (talk) 10:19, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Image tagged as being available on Commons. However, I have no idea whether the Commons licence statement is correct. It survived a deletion request on Commons, but there is no source given, so I'm not sure if there is sufficient proof that it is old enough. --Stefan2 (talk) 11:13, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I can't say either. All I can say is that he version we have is actually better than the version on the commons, so if one should be kept it's probably this one, not the commons one. --Muhandes (talk) 20:57, 5 March 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 as F4 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:02, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Joey Contino.jpeg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Likely copyvio from [1] based on the text on the image. Stefan2 (talk) 16:34, 21 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 as F5 by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:06, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Owning the physical painting does give a license to copy it. Eeekster (talk) 23:50, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- That's what I thought. There is no artist's estate for Weldon Kees and his heirs gave his unpublished literary copyrights the public library in Lincoln, Nebraska. I get permissions from them for text. But I don't think this jpg, which should be fair use, would qualify. What do you think?--Logatorial (talk) 00:28, 22 February 2012 (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⚡ 02:02, 29 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.