Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2013 July 9

< July 8	July 10 >

July 9

File:Carole-Fredericks3.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:10, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Carole-Fredericks3.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

no proof of ownership and no real permission other then "own work" this may be a copyrighted photo Redsky89 (talk) 06:19, 9 July 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:Mucem-Villa-de-la-Mediterannee-Marseille.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 addition of {{FoP-USonly|France}} template. Diannaa (talk) 02:21, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mucem-Villa-de-la-Mediterannee-Marseille.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

The query is due to the building on the left, which is clearly a 'recent' architectural work, France has no FoP, meaning that images of architecure can only be used under non-free terms. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:16, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Both buildings in the foreground were completed in 2013. I believe that the licensing should be identical to that used for the image of the Centre Pompidou, File:Pompidou_center.jpg, also released with the same CC license. The template there indicates that that image cannot be copied to commons. (On Commons there are the following images which could potentially contravene the French FoP law (but see below for 2006 and 2011 rulings on the use of images of public buildings in France on wikipedia): this image File:CarrédArt.JPG of a Norman Foster building in Nimes; this image of the CMA CGM Tower File:Marseille 20120922 16.jpg used as part of the lede image in Marseille and two other articles; this image File:Marseille 20120922 16.jpg of the same two buildings as above while under construction. As with the image of the Centre Pompidou on en.wikipedia.org, it apears to be the US freedom of panorama law that is being applied (public buildings taken in a public space); the images are stored In Florida. On the French wikipedia another building by the same architect Rudy Ricciotti, the Pavillon Noir fr:Fichier:Pavillon_Noir_Aix.jpg in Aix-en-Provence, has an explicit explanation of the FoP laws in France in the template as they apply to wikipedia: "Son utilisation sur Wikipédia est actuellement tolérée comme « exception au droit d'auteur » conformément aux votes de la communauté de 2006 et de 2011. Selon les dispositions de Wikipédia : 'L'importation sur la Wikipédia francophone de photographies libres de bâtiments récents est tolérée. Cependant, l'importation est interdite dans les cas où les ayants droit ont explicitement exprimé leur opposition.'" So for architectual works in France and their use on wikipedia, these images are tolerated unless the architect has expressed their opposition to their use. As such these matters seem quite unclear and should be clarified elsewhere, perhaps with Moonriddengirl. Mathsci (talk) 10:21, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep All you need to do is to add {{FoP-USonly|France}} in order to keep these images on English Wikipedia. US law allows you to use photos of buildings whereas French law does not, so this image is free according to the definition of "free" used by English Wikipedia but not according to the definition used by Commons. The image can therefore not be moved to Commons until 70 years after the death of the architect, but it can still remain here. Note that fr:Modèle:Bâtiment récent tells that the image is used under French Wikipedia's version of WP:NFCC (fr:Wikipédia:Exceptions au droit d'auteur) and that French Wikipedia considers files with that template as unfree because such images are unfree in France. --Stefan2 (talk) 13:08, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Stefan2. I fixed the license to match that of the source on flickr. Thanks Mathsci for uploading. --ELEKHH^T 02:28, 11 July 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:Poktori-3.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:10, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Poktori-3.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

This is artwork for a membership card and not own work as claimed. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:28, 9 July 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:Spcn-screenshots.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:10, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Spcn-screenshots.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

This is a screenshot of a website, and there is no indication the uploader is the content author for the wesbite. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:13, 9 July 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:SOJAMES.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:10, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

I fail to see how a 1917 image can be the uploaders own work, No other authorship information provided. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:32, 9 July 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:Peoria Growth Plan.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:10, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Peoria Growth Plan.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

The licence template states that this was made by the US government. However, at the bottom of the image, it says "Source: BRW, Inc. January 2001." BRW, Inc. sounds like the name of a company, so this is probably not a government work. Stefan2 (talk) 13:01, 9 July 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:Bulgarian cap badge from April Uprising.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 ⚡ 23:00, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bulgarian cap badge from April Uprising.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

See Commons:COM:ART#Photograph of an old coin found on the Internet. Stefan2 (talk) 15:12, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Right, the object may be more than 100 years old, but the photo of it is not. Since the object is a piece of official insignia that is probably not copyright protected, I would suggest using {{Insignia}} in conjunction with a permission tag addressing the copyright status of the image (not the object). Wilhelm Meis (☎ Diskuss | ✍ Beiträge) 13:58, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. The problem is that the uploader hasn't provided any licence or source for the photo of the coin. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:02, 17 July 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:Camel-lights-ua.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; similar packaging has been used for this product since at least 1915. See File:Camels advertisement 1915.jpg. Diannaa (talk) 02:27, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Camel-lights-ua.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Packaging artwork, so this can't be the uploaders own work. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:39, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment wouldn't the camel be PD-old, and thus the entire package, having only the camel as a protectable element, be therefore only the uploader's photograph of the object being protectable? -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 04:57, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The company appears to be an American company. If the dromedary was used before 1 March 1989, and the packaging didn't contain a copyright notice, then the dromedary should be in the public domain. Does packaging usually contain a copyright notice in the United States? There are also other visual effects on the packaging which might be copyrightable... --Stefan2 (talk) 21:01, 17 July 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:Screenshot-playdiplomacy.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:10, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Screenshot-playdiplomacy.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

This is not the work of the uploader. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:31, 9 July 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:Slobodan Jovanovic left.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:10, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Slobodan Jovanovic left.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

This is not a law or decree as required by the template currently used. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:34, 9 July 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:Slobodan Jovanovic right.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:10, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Slobodan Jovanovic right.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

This photo is not a law, not a decree, nor regulation and not an official material. The given licence can not be applied. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:36, 9 July 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:Tertiary structure 2.PNG

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:10, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tertiary structure 2.PNG (delete | talk | history | logs).

No evidence presented that this is a crown work, If anything it's an extract from a scientific paper. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:37, 9 July 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:Album Easy Listening The Wyatt Ruther IV 1973.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:10, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Album Easy Listening The Wyatt Ruther IV 1973.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Thus is clearly a photo of album coverart. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:46, 9 July 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:Irl 9shillingPO.png

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. Diannaa (talk) 02:30, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Irl 9shillingPO.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

I'm not sure this can be licensed as Creative Commons because it's a work of the Irish Post Office or Government. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:40, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I believe this should be fine, as it falls under the remit of commons:Template:PD-IrishGov - see here - Alison ^❤ 06:26, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Commons:Template:PD-IrishGov requires that the work was created at least 50 years ago. When was this created? The stamps say 1969 but this doesn't have to be the year of creation. There is also the URAA problem: unless it entered the public domain in Ireland before 1996, it's copyrighted in the United States for 95 years since publication, unless the Irish government decides otherwise. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:57, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I've refined the details and licnece plus added a move to commons tag. I uploaded this a long before I really understood the copyright issues like I do today. All is good now. The basic postal order design was in use since 1927. ww2censor (talk) 10:29, 10 July 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:AnnSiangHill002.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:10, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:AnnSiangHill002.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

Whilst the photo may be the uploaders work, I am not sure the billboard shown (2D art) is. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:57, 9 July 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:Bundeswehr Cross of Honor for Valor Ribbon Bar.png

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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:10, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bundeswehr Cross of Honor for Valor Ribbon Bar.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

This is a German medal design, so can't be entirely the uploaders own work. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:25, 9 July 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:The Internet, as portrayed in British comedy program The IT Crowd.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 INeverCry (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:10, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Internet, as portrayed in British comedy program The IT Crowd.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

This image is actually a screen-capture from the Television show The IT Crowd see (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDbyYGrswtg) Series 3 Episode 4. I would say that it is either owned by production company TalkbackThames or by the BBC. The show first aired in the UK in December 2008. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 22:03, 9 July 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.