Dont Delet - a nice picture of snow in a big city of southern California itt dosent bug no won! by the way i do care..
User:Ie909 (
talk)November 23, 2007 (UTC)
Dont Delet - I like this picture it shows the nice snow fall in San Bernardino you guys dont even have a picture of a San Bernardino Snowfall so why delet?? just leave it!..
User:Bpz (
talk)November 24, 2007 (UTC) —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
66.81.193.164 (
talk)
Delete While I heard it did snow in SB once a few years ago, which is unusual for that area, the street signs are illegible and there is nothing else in this photo to especially connect the event to SB.
Ameriquedialectics 17:07, 25 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Dont Delet - Dont Delet this picture is a record snowfall so by tht reason it should be set to be viewed by reaserchers, this snow fall was in January 12, 2007... San Bernardino gets snow flurries about every 2-3 years there for this that year it was the 3rd year it snowed year after year after year there fore it should be saved! wiki user(not logged in!)November 25, 2007 (UTC) —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
66.81.193.154 (
talk)
Bizarre licensing; clearly a misunderstanding. Whatever the case, this doesn't look like a free image, and given the user's upload history, this is likely a copyright violation. --
RG2 12:40, 18 November 2007 (UTC)reply
I've removed the clearly bad image tags (wikipedia logo?!?) but I still think it's a "replaceable fair-use" at best. ---
J.S (
T/
C/
WRE) 21:31, 18 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Delete. On the one hand, it's probably replaceable fair-use. However, this uploader has repeatedly refused to provide sources for other images he's uploaded (which, not being sent to IfD, I'm about to speedy delete under the provisions for non-free images without source information). Since we can't determine the source of the image, I don't see how we can use it. —C.Fred (
talk) 22:24, 19 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Copyright violation - The image might be used in violation of copyright. Follow
this link to notice the original at Simonscans.
Pichote (
talk) 15:11, 18 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Delete obvious copyvio, I'll support a speedy for this one... --
Bradeos Graphon (
talk) 22:17, 18 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Exactly,i work for AEK,took the picture,uploaded them all to aekfc.gr
The-real-zeus (
talk) 21:02, 17 November 2007 (UTC)reply
So you wont mind sending an mail from your AEK mailaddress to the OTRS confirming the release or noting on the AEK website that the image is released under CC-BY-2.0 then?
Rettetast 21:06, 17 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Do you have an image with better resolution btw.
Rettetast 21:08, 17 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Sorry mate i dont have a higher one
The-real-zeus (
talk) 21:19, 17 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Thats ok, as long as you verify the copyright as by sending an e-mail, or noting the license on the AEK webpage. That wont be a problem, will it?
Rettetast 21:21, 17 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Great, which method do you prefer. The mail or the website change? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Rettetast (
talk •
contribs)
You know what i dont like that image anymore,i will get a beter one tommorow,could you delete it for me...cheers..lol... :D
The-real-zeus (
talk) 21:32, 17 November 2007 (UTC)reply
In light of
The-real-zeus dubious explanation and his earlier uploads, the image is probably a blatant copyvio. His claims are dubious an I am nominating all of the images where
The-real-zeus has claimed copyright. We can not trust this user when it comes to copyright and his earliers upload should also be deleted.
Rettetast 21:54, 17 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom; based on this latest exchange and the uploader's track record of image policy violations, I feel his claims to own the copyrights to these images are dubious at best. --
Muchness (
talk) 23:50, 19 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Orphaned. Either this is a low-quality bit of photoshopping and not useful for us, or a photograph of a picture and so a copyvio.
Nilfanion (
talk) 20:18, 18 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Dont Delet - a nice picture of snow in a big city of southern California itt dosent bug no won! by the way i do care..
User:Ie909 (
talk)November 23, 2007 (UTC)
Dont Delet - I like this picture it shows the nice snow fall in San Bernardino you guys dont even have a picture of a San Bernardino Snowfall so why delet?? just leave it!..
User:Bpz (
talk)November 24, 2007 (UTC) —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
66.81.193.164 (
talk)
Delete While I heard it did snow in SB once a few years ago, which is unusual for that area, the street signs are illegible and there is nothing else in this photo to especially connect the event to SB.
Ameriquedialectics 17:07, 25 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Dont Delet - Dont Delet this picture is a record snowfall so by tht reason it should be set to be viewed by reaserchers, this snow fall was in January 12, 2007... San Bernardino gets snow flurries about every 2-3 years there for this that year it was the 3rd year it snowed year after year after year there fore it should be saved! wiki user(not logged in!)November 25, 2007 (UTC) —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
66.81.193.154 (
talk)
Bizarre licensing; clearly a misunderstanding. Whatever the case, this doesn't look like a free image, and given the user's upload history, this is likely a copyright violation. --
RG2 12:40, 18 November 2007 (UTC)reply
I've removed the clearly bad image tags (wikipedia logo?!?) but I still think it's a "replaceable fair-use" at best. ---
J.S (
T/
C/
WRE) 21:31, 18 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Delete. On the one hand, it's probably replaceable fair-use. However, this uploader has repeatedly refused to provide sources for other images he's uploaded (which, not being sent to IfD, I'm about to speedy delete under the provisions for non-free images without source information). Since we can't determine the source of the image, I don't see how we can use it. —C.Fred (
talk) 22:24, 19 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Copyright violation - The image might be used in violation of copyright. Follow
this link to notice the original at Simonscans.
Pichote (
talk) 15:11, 18 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Delete obvious copyvio, I'll support a speedy for this one... --
Bradeos Graphon (
talk) 22:17, 18 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Exactly,i work for AEK,took the picture,uploaded them all to aekfc.gr
The-real-zeus (
talk) 21:02, 17 November 2007 (UTC)reply
So you wont mind sending an mail from your AEK mailaddress to the OTRS confirming the release or noting on the AEK website that the image is released under CC-BY-2.0 then?
Rettetast 21:06, 17 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Do you have an image with better resolution btw.
Rettetast 21:08, 17 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Sorry mate i dont have a higher one
The-real-zeus (
talk) 21:19, 17 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Thats ok, as long as you verify the copyright as by sending an e-mail, or noting the license on the AEK webpage. That wont be a problem, will it?
Rettetast 21:21, 17 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Great, which method do you prefer. The mail or the website change? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Rettetast (
talk •
contribs)
You know what i dont like that image anymore,i will get a beter one tommorow,could you delete it for me...cheers..lol... :D
The-real-zeus (
talk) 21:32, 17 November 2007 (UTC)reply
In light of
The-real-zeus dubious explanation and his earlier uploads, the image is probably a blatant copyvio. His claims are dubious an I am nominating all of the images where
The-real-zeus has claimed copyright. We can not trust this user when it comes to copyright and his earliers upload should also be deleted.
Rettetast 21:54, 17 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom; based on this latest exchange and the uploader's track record of image policy violations, I feel his claims to own the copyrights to these images are dubious at best. --
Muchness (
talk) 23:50, 19 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Orphaned. Either this is a low-quality bit of photoshopping and not useful for us, or a photograph of a picture and so a copyvio.
Nilfanion (
talk) 20:18, 18 November 2007 (UTC)reply