From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| < January 20 | January 22 > |
|---|
- 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 ⚡ 01:47, 21 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- File:Grease traps.jpeg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Watermarked Image that links it's source to a commercial site. 293.xx.xxx.xx ( talk) 00:50, 21 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.
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
- 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) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC) reply
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3APossibly+unfree+files%2F2010+January+21%23File%3AIrish+ten+shilling+coin+%28obverse%29.png%5D%5D){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=history){kind=link}
- Currency image Date given is not OLD enough to be PD - Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 01:07, 21 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- What part of "own image" (i.e. my scan) is not understood. Wikipedia spends too much time playing musical chairs with policies. If they want to delete, let them.
Djegan (
talk)
18:32, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
reply
- The problem is that the image here is not your own...at least not all of it. The problem here is that the 3D work of art you have taken a picture of (a coin) is not necessarily in the Public Domain. Simply taking a picture of an object doesn't mean that the artist doesn't retain copyrights to said object. While your personal photos fall under fair use criteria, you don't have permission to give their rights away. — BQZip01 — talk 21:25, 23 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 Tbsdy lives ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:42, 1 February 2010 (UTC) reply
- File:Assembleparis2012.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- No FOP in France Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 01:28, 21 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- Hello, author of this photo here. I'm an American citizen who took this on a school trip in France. Don't know how this would affect this listing, but just for reference. Morhange ( talk) 09:19, 21 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- Yeah...here's the thing. The French don't believe in Freedom of Panorama and they have copyrights on their buildings too (taking a picture of the Lourve [sp?] technically violates their copyright...). In short, France has made it very difficult to find free images in their country. — BQZip01 — talk 21:27, 23 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.
_Store.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
- 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 ⚡ 00:38, 25 January 2010 (UTC) reply
_Store.JPG){kind=link}
- File:Hinkles’ (Lowther's) Store.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
_Store.JPG&action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3APossibly+unfree+files%2F2010+January+21%23File%3AHinkles%E2%80%99+%28Lowther%27s%29+Store.JPG%5D%5D){kind=link}
_Store.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Store.JPG&action=history){kind=link}
- User claims they created this photograph himself, but considering the apparent age of this picture that would seem doubtful. I suspect this may be a copyrighted work.
Brian Powell (
talk)
02:21, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
reply
- 'Do not delete This image was a part of a powerpoint presentation given to me by Dr Stanley "Judd" Anderson the Northern Webster Co. Historian. True this Image is old, but the image is indede free as indicated by the licence that acompanies it, and its not Public Domain. Because of this its encyclopedic. Any complaints are to be made on my Talk Page, and I'll consider it in due time.
-- Todd Schoolcraft ( talk) 19:12, 24 January 2010 (UTC) reply
_Store.JPG){kind=link}
- Delete Given the age of the subjects in the photo, I think it is likely PD. Without context though, it is unencyclopedic. — BQZip01 — talk 21:29, 23 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- Comment: It doesn't help that Todd Schoolcraft has apparently no idea what 'public domain' 'free' and 'licensed' mean (or even the difference between an image and an electronic copy of an image), or how to fill in the template accompanying the photo, but I think if someone has the patience to hack the full tale out of him it will turn out that both the persons in the image and the photographer are known to the person who gave him an electronic copy of the image, that person possessing the original image, and that the image is in fact so old that it is PD. Let me have a conversation with him, and see if I can sort this out.-- Elen of the Roads ( talk) 19:24, 24 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 Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC) reply
- File:Burnley Play-Off winners.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Appears to be media photo, based on the low resolution, quality, similarity to this image, and the user's upload history. Mosmof ( talk) 04:02, 21 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 Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC) reply
- Appears to be media photo, based on the low resolution, quality and the user's upload history. Mosmof ( talk) 04:02, 21 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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons, please nominate it for deletion there if you feel it is non-free. AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:53, 21 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- File:Sorrells.gif ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- My initial concerns about this image were raised when I noted strong similarities between it and the figures in Sorrells et al, which are copyrighted by the British Journal of Urology. It is clear that this image is a derived work of figures 1, 2, and 3. (Compare, for example, the shape of the lines depicting veins on the penis — they are identical on both images.)
I later found this — a page containing three images ( 1 2 and 3), which when joined together vertically form this image.
It is therefore clear to me that this is not a public domain image. It is a derived work of the "circumstitions.com" images, which in turn are derived works of BJU-copyrighted images. Jakew ( talk) 12:37, 21 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 Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC) reply
- File:File:BlueFrenchBulldog.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Have learned that person who gave me permission to use this file is NOT photographer or file owner. Actual owner has requested file be removed. FrogDogz ( talk) 02:32, 21 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom. — BQZip01 — talk 21:32, 23 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 Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC) reply
- File:Alavi game.PNG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Fake image. Neither the ESRB or PEGI have a rating for this game. I also have never seen PC DVDROM in this format before. MrKIA11 ( talk) 21:07, 21 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom. — BQZip01 — talk 21:32, 23 January 2010 (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
⚡
00:38, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
reply
- This game appears to be a WP:HOAX with no third-party sources to back up the existence of the game. — BQZip01 — talk 00:21, 27 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 Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC) reply
- File:JeromeHeadshot222.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Publicity still of living actor. Uploader gave no details about the image's owner, the subject, or the photographer. Dori ❦ ( Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 23:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom. — BQZip01 — talk 21:32, 23 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- Delete unless there is some proof forthcoming. This is clearly a professional shot (f 2.8, well taken and posed, 5D camera) that probably does not belong to the uploader. I hope to be proved wrong though as this is a very nice portrait - Peripitus (Talk) 02:44, 28 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- Comment Uploader appears to be an SPA, with some connection to the film
Anderson's Cross, which (according to its website) is going to get some kind of U.S. release next month.
DoriSmith (
talk ·
contribs) has been vigilant in cutting back the editor's contributions to
WP:RS and
WP:NPOV. As the uploader seems not to have used WP beyond this single topic, suggest contacting by email before finalising any deletion. IMO it is definitely not impossible that we may be able to get an OTRS ticket for this image; but so far the uploader is probably completely unaware of these discussions.
Jheald (
talk)
12:57, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
reply
- An Illumination Pictures-focused SPA, user:Extracare4u (probably a PR rep), recently uploaded a number of images and edited related articles. So far, two-thirds of the files have been deleted, and the articles required a fair amount of effort to whip into shape. The status of the film Anderson's Cross (which came out in 2007 and so isn't likely to get further coverage) is irrelevant as neither this image or the next is used on that article. Keeping copyvio images around on the off-chance the uploader will someday return and provide official permission is a poor idea, and emailing isn't possible, as no address was provided. Dori ❦ ( Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 01:55, 29 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 Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC) reply
- File:TroyHattHeadshot.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Publicity still of living actor. Uploader gave no details about the image's owner, the subject, or the photographer. Dori ❦ ( Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 23:45, 21 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom. — BQZip01 — talk 21:32, 23 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- Comment as per immediately above -- same uploader. Jheald ( talk) 13:00, 28 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.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| < January 20 | January 22 > |
|---|
- 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 ⚡ 01:47, 21 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- File:Grease traps.jpeg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Watermarked Image that links it's source to a commercial site. 293.xx.xxx.xx ( talk) 00:50, 21 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 Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC) reply
- Currency image Date given is not OLD enough to be PD - Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 01:07, 21 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- What part of "own image" (i.e. my scan) is not understood. Wikipedia spends too much time playing musical chairs with policies. If they want to delete, let them.
Djegan (
talk)
18:32, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
reply
- The problem is that the image here is not your own...at least not all of it. The problem here is that the 3D work of art you have taken a picture of (a coin) is not necessarily in the Public Domain. Simply taking a picture of an object doesn't mean that the artist doesn't retain copyrights to said object. While your personal photos fall under fair use criteria, you don't have permission to give their rights away. — BQZip01 — talk 21:25, 23 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 Tbsdy lives ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:42, 1 February 2010 (UTC) reply
- File:Assembleparis2012.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- No FOP in France Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 01:28, 21 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- Hello, author of this photo here. I'm an American citizen who took this on a school trip in France. Don't know how this would affect this listing, but just for reference. Morhange ( talk) 09:19, 21 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- Yeah...here's the thing. The French don't believe in Freedom of Panorama and they have copyrights on their buildings too (taking a picture of the Lourve [sp?] technically violates their copyright...). In short, France has made it very difficult to find free images in their country. — BQZip01 — talk 21:27, 23 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 Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 00:38, 25 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- File:Hinkles’ (Lowther's) Store.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- User claims they created this photograph himself, but considering the apparent age of this picture that would seem doubtful. I suspect this may be a copyrighted work.
Brian Powell (
talk)
02:21, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
reply
- 'Do not delete This image was a part of a powerpoint presentation given to me by Dr Stanley "Judd" Anderson the Northern Webster Co. Historian. True this Image is old, but the image is indede free as indicated by the licence that acompanies it, and its not Public Domain. Because of this its encyclopedic. Any complaints are to be made on my Talk Page, and I'll consider it in due time.
-- Todd Schoolcraft ( talk) 19:12, 24 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- Delete Given the age of the subjects in the photo, I think it is likely PD. Without context though, it is unencyclopedic. — BQZip01 — talk 21:29, 23 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- Comment: It doesn't help that Todd Schoolcraft has apparently no idea what 'public domain' 'free' and 'licensed' mean (or even the difference between an image and an electronic copy of an image), or how to fill in the template accompanying the photo, but I think if someone has the patience to hack the full tale out of him it will turn out that both the persons in the image and the photographer are known to the person who gave him an electronic copy of the image, that person possessing the original image, and that the image is in fact so old that it is PD. Let me have a conversation with him, and see if I can sort this out.-- Elen of the Roads ( talk) 19:24, 24 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 Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC) reply
- File:Burnley Play-Off winners.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Appears to be media photo, based on the low resolution, quality, similarity to this image, and the user's upload history. Mosmof ( talk) 04:02, 21 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 Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC) reply
- Appears to be media photo, based on the low resolution, quality and the user's upload history. Mosmof ( talk) 04:02, 21 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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons, please nominate it for deletion there if you feel it is non-free. AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:53, 21 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- File:Sorrells.gif ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- My initial concerns about this image were raised when I noted strong similarities between it and the figures in Sorrells et al, which are copyrighted by the British Journal of Urology. It is clear that this image is a derived work of figures 1, 2, and 3. (Compare, for example, the shape of the lines depicting veins on the penis — they are identical on both images.)
I later found this — a page containing three images ( 1 2 and 3), which when joined together vertically form this image.
It is therefore clear to me that this is not a public domain image. It is a derived work of the "circumstitions.com" images, which in turn are derived works of BJU-copyrighted images. Jakew ( talk) 12:37, 21 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 Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC) reply
- File:File:BlueFrenchBulldog.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Have learned that person who gave me permission to use this file is NOT photographer or file owner. Actual owner has requested file be removed. FrogDogz ( talk) 02:32, 21 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom. — BQZip01 — talk 21:32, 23 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 Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC) reply
- File:Alavi game.PNG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Fake image. Neither the ESRB or PEGI have a rating for this game. I also have never seen PC DVDROM in this format before. MrKIA11 ( talk) 21:07, 21 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom. — BQZip01 — talk 21:32, 23 January 2010 (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
⚡
00:38, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
reply
- This game appears to be a WP:HOAX with no third-party sources to back up the existence of the game. — BQZip01 — talk 00:21, 27 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 Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC) reply
- File:JeromeHeadshot222.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Publicity still of living actor. Uploader gave no details about the image's owner, the subject, or the photographer. Dori ❦ ( Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 23:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom. — BQZip01 — talk 21:32, 23 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- Delete unless there is some proof forthcoming. This is clearly a professional shot (f 2.8, well taken and posed, 5D camera) that probably does not belong to the uploader. I hope to be proved wrong though as this is a very nice portrait - Peripitus (Talk) 02:44, 28 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- Comment Uploader appears to be an SPA, with some connection to the film
Anderson's Cross, which (according to its website) is going to get some kind of U.S. release next month.
DoriSmith (
talk ·
contribs) has been vigilant in cutting back the editor's contributions to
WP:RS and
WP:NPOV. As the uploader seems not to have used WP beyond this single topic, suggest contacting by email before finalising any deletion. IMO it is definitely not impossible that we may be able to get an OTRS ticket for this image; but so far the uploader is probably completely unaware of these discussions.
Jheald (
talk)
12:57, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
reply
- An Illumination Pictures-focused SPA, user:Extracare4u (probably a PR rep), recently uploaded a number of images and edited related articles. So far, two-thirds of the files have been deleted, and the articles required a fair amount of effort to whip into shape. The status of the film Anderson's Cross (which came out in 2007 and so isn't likely to get further coverage) is irrelevant as neither this image or the next is used on that article. Keeping copyvio images around on the off-chance the uploader will someday return and provide official permission is a poor idea, and emailing isn't possible, as no address was provided. Dori ❦ ( Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 01:55, 29 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 Fastily ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC) reply
- File:TroyHattHeadshot.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Publicity still of living actor. Uploader gave no details about the image's owner, the subject, or the photographer. Dori ❦ ( Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 23:45, 21 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom. — BQZip01 — talk 21:32, 23 January 2010 (UTC) reply
- Comment as per immediately above -- same uploader. Jheald ( talk) 13:00, 28 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.