The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Calliopejen1 (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
Source at Flickr shows 'all rights reserved'. Videmus Omnia Talk 02:02, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Calliopejen1 (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
Apparently derivative of an image copyrighted by Ron Cobb, as mentioned in the image description. Videmus Omnia Talk 02:42, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Calliopejen1 (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
Another derivative work of a copyrighted design. Videmus Omnia Talk 02:43, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as
I6 by
ElinorD (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA) A file with this name on
Commons is now visible.
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
Photo of a copyrighted logo. Videmus Omnia Talk 03:22, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Calliopejen1 (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
No proof that uploader is creator. Videmus Omnia Talk 03:58, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Calliopejen1 (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
No evidence of {{ PD-release}}. Videmus Omnia Talk 04:09, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Calliopejen1 (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
Listed as a copyrighted image. No rationale is given for its use on Wikipedia. Hux 09:19, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Calliopejen1 (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
Listed as a copyrighted image, but no rationale is given for it's use on Wikipedia. Hux 09:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
Correct license & FUR supplied SkierRMH ( talk) 07:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as
I5 by
East718 (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
Licensed as user-made, but it seems to be an album cover. — Angr 16:59, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as
G5 by
ESkog (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
Supposedly a promo image grabbed from some image sharing site. I can find no evidence that this as actauly been released under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 license. Sherool (talk) 20:47, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Calliopejen1 (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
Appears to be a 2-D photo of a 2-D work, and so a derivative work. Seems clear to me that the copyright should still hold. — ( ESkog)( Talk) 22:37, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
Correct logo license provided SkierRMH ( talk) 07:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as
G5 by
Ohnoitsjamie (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
No proof that logo is licensed under the GFDL. Videmus Omnia Talk 22:45, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Nv8200p (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
No evidence that uploader is creator or that image is public domain. Videmus Omnia Talk 23:44, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Calliopejen1 (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
Source at Flickr shows 'all rights reserved'. Videmus Omnia Talk 02:02, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Calliopejen1 (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
Apparently derivative of an image copyrighted by Ron Cobb, as mentioned in the image description. Videmus Omnia Talk 02:42, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Calliopejen1 (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
Another derivative work of a copyrighted design. Videmus Omnia Talk 02:43, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as
I6 by
ElinorD (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA) A file with this name on
Commons is now visible.
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
Photo of a copyrighted logo. Videmus Omnia Talk 03:22, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Calliopejen1 (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
No proof that uploader is creator. Videmus Omnia Talk 03:58, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Calliopejen1 (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
No evidence of {{ PD-release}}. Videmus Omnia Talk 04:09, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Calliopejen1 (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
Listed as a copyrighted image. No rationale is given for its use on Wikipedia. Hux 09:19, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Calliopejen1 (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
Listed as a copyrighted image, but no rationale is given for it's use on Wikipedia. Hux 09:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
Correct license & FUR supplied SkierRMH ( talk) 07:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as
I5 by
East718 (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
Licensed as user-made, but it seems to be an album cover. — Angr 16:59, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as
G5 by
ESkog (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
Supposedly a promo image grabbed from some image sharing site. I can find no evidence that this as actauly been released under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 license. Sherool (talk) 20:47, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Calliopejen1 (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
Appears to be a 2-D photo of a 2-D work, and so a derivative work. Seems clear to me that the copyright should still hold. — ( ESkog)( Talk) 22:37, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
Correct logo license provided SkierRMH ( talk) 07:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as
G5 by
Ohnoitsjamie (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
No proof that logo is licensed under the GFDL. Videmus Omnia Talk 22:45, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by
Nv8200p (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 01:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
reply
No evidence that uploader is creator or that image is public domain. Videmus Omnia Talk 23:44, 23 July 2007 (UTC) reply