From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| < December 7 | December 9 > |
|---|
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:27, 22 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- No evidence that this was taken by a US Government photographer. Source link to a Massachusetts state website is broken. Durova 372 00:12, 8 December 2009 (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 image 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 Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:27, 22 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- File:Shippingout.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- No evidence that this was taken by a US Army employee; source link to a Massachusetts state government site is broken. Durova 372 00:14, 8 December 2009 (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 image 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 Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:16, 24 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- File:Otlet.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Source page doesn't indicate this image is public domain, image looks like original work, other content is there seems to be non-free, and user was known for adding non-free files at the time period -- C. A. Russell ( talk) 00:59, 8 December 2009 (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 image 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: Deleted as copyright violation. Amalthea 02:14, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- File:Rihannarussianroulete.png ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Screenshot of a music video, highly unlikely the uploader owns the copyright to this image. —
ξ
xplicit
02:06, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
reply
- Clear cut copyvio, uploader even provided a link to the source, claim that he owns copyright is not believable, and he contradicts himself anyway. Amalthea 02:14, 8 December 2009 (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 image 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: Deleted, it's a Rex Features stock image ( Set, thumbnail)
- File:Rihannaxfactor.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Author has uploaded a few images with questionable licensing attributes, making it unlikely that the uploader owns the copyright to this image. — ξ xplicit 02:08, 8 December 2009 (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 image 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 Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:27, 22 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- File:Navy-flag.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- No source provided, license claimed as own Zoo Fari 04:19, 8 December 2009 (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 image 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 Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:27, 22 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- File:Beverlybayne2.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- File indicates this was taken before 1923, however there's no source information which is needed for confirmation. Thirdship ( talk) 05:44, 8 December 2009 (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 image 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 Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:27, 22 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- File:Angshumaner3.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Film poster; no source; no metadata; unlikely uploader is (c) holder Skier Dude ( talk) 08:15, 8 December 2009 (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 image 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 Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:27, 22 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- File:Happy Birthday to Kagosha.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Anime poster, copyright violation. AM ( talk) 10:24, 8 December 2009 (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 image 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 ⚡ 02:12, 23 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- File:Vizagstrategic.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- This could be the works of a US Navy photographer but it is claimed by the uploader as his own work, while not describing how he got to take this shot. This is is only possible if he was an official photographer for the Indian Armed Forces, taking a snapshot whilst on official duty on a military aircraft. Dave 1185 14:36, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- According to the meta data this images File:Vizagcity.jpg (on Commons) is probably from the same source, data 09:26, 11 February 2006 with a Canon EOS 20D. Subject image was taken at 09:06, 11 February 2006. MilborneOne ( talk) 14:48, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- Couldn't these be self-taken by an airman whose official duties did not include photography? Frankly, I have no idea how ownership would work in that case; I believe it would vary according to the military code of the country. I don't know what to do with this one. Chick Bowen 06:00, 6 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- I think the ownership is that of the uploader. 71.90.100.176 ( talk) 23:38, 22 January 2010 (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 image 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 Marine 69-71 ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:45, 11 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- File:Rebekah Coleberg.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Subject of article was 5 years old on January 1, 1923, making it impossible that this image satisfies the PD tag which is currently on the image. ( ESkog)( Talk) 20:01, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- Keep, The proper fixes have been made. Image source and proper license and rationale. Tony the Marine ( talk) 22:49, 8 December 2009 (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. Otherwise, unless there is another reason for listing here, the listing will be closed by an administrator and the image kept. AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:48, 9 December 2009 (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 image 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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons, please nominate it for deletion there if you feel it is non-free. AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:48, 9 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- File:Sexy Sam.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Woman shown on the image is a porn/erotic model. The uploader claims the image as its own, but doesnt support that claim with any information. Found thru yahoo: http://www.johnnysporn.com/lingerie-small-tits/lingerie-small-tits-50.html (link contains 2 nude images) Audioxcel 372 22:59, 8 December 2009 (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.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| < December 7 | December 9 > |
|---|
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:27, 22 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- No evidence that this was taken by a US Government photographer. Source link to a Massachusetts state website is broken. Durova 372 00:12, 8 December 2009 (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 image 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 Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:27, 22 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- File:Shippingout.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- No evidence that this was taken by a US Army employee; source link to a Massachusetts state government site is broken. Durova 372 00:14, 8 December 2009 (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 image 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 Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:16, 24 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- File:Otlet.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Source page doesn't indicate this image is public domain, image looks like original work, other content is there seems to be non-free, and user was known for adding non-free files at the time period -- C. A. Russell ( talk) 00:59, 8 December 2009 (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 image 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: Deleted as copyright violation. Amalthea 02:14, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- File:Rihannarussianroulete.png ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Screenshot of a music video, highly unlikely the uploader owns the copyright to this image. —
ξ
xplicit
02:06, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
reply
- Clear cut copyvio, uploader even provided a link to the source, claim that he owns copyright is not believable, and he contradicts himself anyway. Amalthea 02:14, 8 December 2009 (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 image 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: Deleted, it's a Rex Features stock image ( Set, thumbnail)
- File:Rihannaxfactor.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Author has uploaded a few images with questionable licensing attributes, making it unlikely that the uploader owns the copyright to this image. — ξ xplicit 02:08, 8 December 2009 (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 image 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 Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:27, 22 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- File:Navy-flag.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- No source provided, license claimed as own Zoo Fari 04:19, 8 December 2009 (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 image 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 Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:27, 22 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- File:Beverlybayne2.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- File indicates this was taken before 1923, however there's no source information which is needed for confirmation. Thirdship ( talk) 05:44, 8 December 2009 (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 image 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 Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:27, 22 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- File:Angshumaner3.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Film poster; no source; no metadata; unlikely uploader is (c) holder Skier Dude ( talk) 08:15, 8 December 2009 (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 image 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 Explicit ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:27, 22 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- File:Happy Birthday to Kagosha.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Anime poster, copyright violation. AM ( talk) 10:24, 8 December 2009 (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 image 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 ⚡ 02:12, 23 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- File:Vizagstrategic.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- This could be the works of a US Navy photographer but it is claimed by the uploader as his own work, while not describing how he got to take this shot. This is is only possible if he was an official photographer for the Indian Armed Forces, taking a snapshot whilst on official duty on a military aircraft. Dave 1185 14:36, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- According to the meta data this images File:Vizagcity.jpg (on Commons) is probably from the same source, data 09:26, 11 February 2006 with a Canon EOS 20D. Subject image was taken at 09:06, 11 February 2006. MilborneOne ( talk) 14:48, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- Couldn't these be self-taken by an airman whose official duties did not include photography? Frankly, I have no idea how ownership would work in that case; I believe it would vary according to the military code of the country. I don't know what to do with this one. Chick Bowen 06:00, 6 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- I think the ownership is that of the uploader. 71.90.100.176 ( talk) 23:38, 22 January 2010 (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 image 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 Marine 69-71 ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:45, 11 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- File:Rebekah Coleberg.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Subject of article was 5 years old on January 1, 1923, making it impossible that this image satisfies the PD tag which is currently on the image. ( ESkog)( Talk) 20:01, 8 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- Keep, The proper fixes have been made. Image source and proper license and rationale. Tony the Marine ( talk) 22:49, 8 December 2009 (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. Otherwise, unless there is another reason for listing here, the listing will be closed by an administrator and the image kept. AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:48, 9 December 2009 (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 image 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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons, please nominate it for deletion there if you feel it is non-free. AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:48, 9 December 2009 (UTC) reply
- File:Sexy Sam.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Woman shown on the image is a porn/erotic model. The uploader claims the image as its own, but doesnt support that claim with any information. Found thru yahoo: http://www.johnnysporn.com/lingerie-small-tits/lingerie-small-tits-50.html (link contains 2 nude images) Audioxcel 372 22:59, 8 December 2009 (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.