- 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 Skier Dude ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:23, 30 September 2009 (UTC) reply
Unused album/single cover, no indication uploader holds copyright to release image. Optigan13 ( talk) 00:29, 16 September 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 Drilnoth ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:51, 7 October 2009 (UTC) reply
Delete: Apparently Italian law does not prove government produced images are in the public domain per commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Category:PD Italy which confirms the Italian government public domain licence is unproven. The identical image, unloaded to the commons by the same user back in March 2008 has been nominated for deletion as having insufficient information to confirm the copyright status. ww2censor ( talk) 04:11, 16 September 2009 (UTC) reply
- It's a government insignia of a subnational entity that ceased to exist over 50 years ago. I wonder sometimes why there are never any coats of arms on here, I suppose you guys are the reason. Ingoman ( talk) 17:32, 16 September 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 Skier Dude ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:23, 30 September 2009 (UTC) reply
Uploader of the image is a blocked sockpuppet of Pokista02 ( talk · contribs), both known for uploading images in violation of copyright, which brings into question as whether the uploader truly owns the copyright to this image. — Σ xplicit 04:24, 16 September 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 Feydey ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:50, 16 September 2009 (UTC) reply
Judging from the image description and other factors, it looks likely that the uploader just grabbed this image from episcopalatlanta.org without a care as to copyright. Stifle ( talk) 09:17, 16 September 2009 (UTC) reply
- Clearly a copyvio that should be speedied. ww2censor ( talk) 14:58, 16 September 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 Garion96 ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:11, 18 October 2009 (UTC) reply
Source information provided is simply "Public information Web site"; this isn't enough to verify that the image is has been released to the public domain by the copyright holder. + An gr 09:56, 16 September 2009 (UTC) reply
- The image is of an 80-year-old map and is not under copyright. It is a reproduction photograph that is itself not copyrightable, and was taken from a Web site that only contains such material. --
Futhark|
Talk
11:25, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
reply
- How do we know the original map is not under copyright? We have to know who the creator of the map is and that he died before 1939 (for {{ PD-old-70}}), or that the map was first published before 1923 (for {{ PD-US-1923-abroad}}). + An gr 11:41, 16 September 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 Drilnoth ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:51, 7 October 2009 (UTC) reply
Unlikely that the uploader has the right to release into the public domain; the card design is copyrighted even if he may have taken the photo himself. Stifle ( talk) 10:12, 16 September 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 Drilnoth ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:51, 7 October 2009 (UTC) reply
Unlikely that the uploader has the right to release into the public domain; the card design is copyrighted even if he may have taken the photo himself. Stifle ( talk) 10:12, 16 September 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 Skier Dude ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:24, 30 September 2009 (UTC) reply
This is copyrighted screenshot claimed as self-made. Vanjagenije ( talk) 11:01, 16 September 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 Drilnoth ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:51, 7 October 2009 (UTC) reply
Delete: Freedom of panorama does not apply in the US, so the artist hold the copyright and has not released this as a freely licenced image. ww2censor ( talk) 15:45, 16 September 2009 (UTC) reply
- Monument is on the grounds of the University of Rhode Island and was commissioned by the State of Rhode Island, a public entity that holds the rights. Innapoy ( talk) 15:25, 17 September 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 Drilnoth ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:51, 7 October 2009 (UTC) reply
There is no evidence supplied that the original painting is in the public domain. The title, artist and date of production are not given. It is consequently impossible to say that this work dates prior to 1923 or that a photograph has been made public domain. Ash ( talk) 21:20, 16 September 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 Garion96 ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:11, 18 October 2009 (UTC) reply
There is no source information for this file or any way of confirming if this is Morya as stated. Consequently the rationale that it illustrates the subject cannot be demonstrated. Ash ( talk) 21:58, 16 September 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 ⚡ 03:23, 30 September 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 Skier Dude ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:23, 30 September 2009 (UTC) reply
Unused album/single cover, no indication uploader holds copyright to release image. Optigan13 ( talk) 00:29, 16 September 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 Drilnoth ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:51, 7 October 2009 (UTC) reply
Delete: Apparently Italian law does not prove government produced images are in the public domain per commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Category:PD Italy which confirms the Italian government public domain licence is unproven. The identical image, unloaded to the commons by the same user back in March 2008 has been nominated for deletion as having insufficient information to confirm the copyright status. ww2censor ( talk) 04:11, 16 September 2009 (UTC) reply
- It's a government insignia of a subnational entity that ceased to exist over 50 years ago. I wonder sometimes why there are never any coats of arms on here, I suppose you guys are the reason. Ingoman ( talk) 17:32, 16 September 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 Skier Dude ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:23, 30 September 2009 (UTC) reply
Uploader of the image is a blocked sockpuppet of Pokista02 ( talk · contribs), both known for uploading images in violation of copyright, which brings into question as whether the uploader truly owns the copyright to this image. — Σ xplicit 04:24, 16 September 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 Feydey ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:50, 16 September 2009 (UTC) reply
Judging from the image description and other factors, it looks likely that the uploader just grabbed this image from episcopalatlanta.org without a care as to copyright. Stifle ( talk) 09:17, 16 September 2009 (UTC) reply
- Clearly a copyvio that should be speedied. ww2censor ( talk) 14:58, 16 September 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 Garion96 ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:11, 18 October 2009 (UTC) reply
Source information provided is simply "Public information Web site"; this isn't enough to verify that the image is has been released to the public domain by the copyright holder. + An gr 09:56, 16 September 2009 (UTC) reply
- The image is of an 80-year-old map and is not under copyright. It is a reproduction photograph that is itself not copyrightable, and was taken from a Web site that only contains such material. --
Futhark|
Talk
11:25, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
reply
- How do we know the original map is not under copyright? We have to know who the creator of the map is and that he died before 1939 (for {{ PD-old-70}}), or that the map was first published before 1923 (for {{ PD-US-1923-abroad}}). + An gr 11:41, 16 September 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 Drilnoth ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:51, 7 October 2009 (UTC) reply
Unlikely that the uploader has the right to release into the public domain; the card design is copyrighted even if he may have taken the photo himself. Stifle ( talk) 10:12, 16 September 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 Drilnoth ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:51, 7 October 2009 (UTC) reply
Unlikely that the uploader has the right to release into the public domain; the card design is copyrighted even if he may have taken the photo himself. Stifle ( talk) 10:12, 16 September 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 Skier Dude ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:24, 30 September 2009 (UTC) reply
This is copyrighted screenshot claimed as self-made. Vanjagenije ( talk) 11:01, 16 September 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 Drilnoth ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:51, 7 October 2009 (UTC) reply
Delete: Freedom of panorama does not apply in the US, so the artist hold the copyright and has not released this as a freely licenced image. ww2censor ( talk) 15:45, 16 September 2009 (UTC) reply
- Monument is on the grounds of the University of Rhode Island and was commissioned by the State of Rhode Island, a public entity that holds the rights. Innapoy ( talk) 15:25, 17 September 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 Drilnoth ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:51, 7 October 2009 (UTC) reply
There is no evidence supplied that the original painting is in the public domain. The title, artist and date of production are not given. It is consequently impossible to say that this work dates prior to 1923 or that a photograph has been made public domain. Ash ( talk) 21:20, 16 September 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 Garion96 ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:11, 18 October 2009 (UTC) reply
There is no source information for this file or any way of confirming if this is Morya as stated. Consequently the rationale that it illustrates the subject cannot be demonstrated. Ash ( talk) 21:58, 16 September 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 ⚡ 03:23, 30 September 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.