March 14
File:Polo England 1915 circa.png
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Keep, with the addition of a fair use rationale. Dianna ( talk) 20:41, 22 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- File:Polo England 1915 circa.png ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- While this image "may" be from 1915 (although the source doesn't specify or hint at a date), but is, according to the source, an image from a private collection (note also the signatures on the picture, suggesting that this is a one-off). If this image wasn't published before 1923 (and we have evidence to suggest that it wasn't), and we don't know when the photographer died, then the image has to be assumed to be copyrighted. Fram ( talk) 15:15, 14 March 2013 (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. AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:10, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Frederick William Rowe.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Keep, with the adition of a fair use rationale. Dianna ( talk) 20:35, 22 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- File:Frederick William Rowe.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- File listed as being ca. 1910, without any evidence to support this. Image from findagrave, without prior source. Unknown whether this image was even published originally or not (which changes the copyright limits: if taken before 1923 but not published before 1923, the date of first publication comes into play here). There is a fair chance that the file is PD, but that isn't sufficient: we need certainty. Fram ( talk) 14:54, 14 March 2013 (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. AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:10, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Samuel Arthur Weiss.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Keep, with the addition of a fair use rationale. Dianna ( talk) 20:44, 22 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- File:Samuel Arthur Weiss.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- No evidence given at all for why this image would be public domain. Source is Findagrave, date is fairly probably post-1923 (subject is born in 1902), no evidence of who was the photographer or where this picture was first published. Nothing to support a PD license here. Fram ( talk) 14:26, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- Addendum: it seems possible that the Findagrave file was taken from [1]: that site gives a 1943 date. Fram ( talk) 14:46, 14 March 2013 (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. AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Fausto-Isidro-MEZAFLORES.png
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Fausto-Isidro-MEZAFLORES.png ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Yes the picture appeared in a US government document, however there is no proof that the picture it's self was taken by a US government agent, no mention in the article on him of ever being arrested in the US. LGA talk edits 07:51, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Persatuan Bolasepak Melayu Kedah Darul Aman.png
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Keep, with the addition of a fair use rationale. Dianna ( talk) 20:49, 22 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- The uploader claims to be the creator, but this is the logo of PB Melayu Kedah, a Malaysian football team. The same uploader also claimed to be the creator of File:Kedah United.png, which is the logo of a different Malaysian football team; that file description page has since been changed. — Bkell ( talk) 13:08, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Seasalt.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Seasalt.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Derivative work. See Commons:COM:CB#Product packaging. Stefan2 ( talk) 14:22, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Rough guide africanbluesCD.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Rough guide africanbluesCD.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Derivative work of a CD. Stefan2 ( talk) 14:36, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Peanut butter.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Peanut butter.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Derivative work. Stefan2 ( talk) 14:48, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:CommercialComposter.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:CommercialComposter.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- The text is in Dutch, but it doesn't say in which Dutch-speaking country this was taken. No freedom of panorama in Belgium. FOP status in Suriname unknown. Not clear if the posters are permanently installed as required by Dutch law. Stefan2 ( talk) 14:52, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Black Cardamom.JPG
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Black Cardamom.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- 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.
File:Black Onion Seed.JPG
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Black Onion Seed.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- 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.
File:Coriander Powder.JPG
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Coriander Powder.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- 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.
File:Ginger Powder.JPG
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Ginger Powder.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- 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.
File:Madras Curry Powder.JPG
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Madras Curry Powder.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- 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.
File:Aude red rice.JPG
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Aude red rice.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- 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.
File:Red Curry Paste.JPG
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Red Curry Paste.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- 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.
File:Barley Miso.JPG
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Barley Miso.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- 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.
File:Breakfast Tea.JPG
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Breakfast Tea.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- 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.
File:Don Freeman 1976 Press Release.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- Invalid licence claim. Is there a copyright notice somewhere in the press release? You can't see the back of it and it seems to have been cropped. Stefan2 ( talk) 16:13, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Bernardo Moya.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Bernardo Moya.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Appears everywhere on the Internet, for example here, but only in smaller resolution, it seems. Stefan2 ( talk) 16:17, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- a google search by image i agree, it's everwhere. I reported the uploader to AIV earlier today, after he removed csd tags twice. Aunva6 ( talk) 16:25, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Michael Acton Smith Portrait.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- Appears at lots of places everywhere on the Internet, although only in smaller resolution as far as I can see. No evidence that the uploader is Emilie Fjola Sandy who is listed as the copyright holder in the EXIF. Stefan2 ( talk) 19:02, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Lovefilm DVD Envelope.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Kept the new cropped version and deleted the larger version that included a copyright DVD. Dianna ( talk) 21:15, 22 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- File:Lovefilm DVD Envelope.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Derivative work of the disc and the envelope. Stefan2 ( talk) 19:09, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- Delete as even though the Lovefilm logo and envelope design are not copyrightable (fail threshold of originality) there is just enough copyrightable material on the DVD face in this image to make it a derivative work, a claim of fair use would fail as it can be replaced with an image containing a DVD with no copyrightable material on its face.
LGA
talk
edits
19:57, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- The stuff around the "PROBLEMS?" text is clearly copyrightable. --
Stefan2 (
talk)
20:58, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- Technically yes, but probably de minimis, but a FUR could be made for that. LGA talk edits 19:47, 15 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- The stuff around the "PROBLEMS?" text is clearly copyrightable. --
Stefan2 (
talk)
20:58, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- Keep the file has now been changed so it is just the Envelope and the disc is not show you can delete the previous version thanks Kelvin 101 ( talk) 20:30, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- If this is to be deleted you could say the same about this picture [2] which has been on here since 2006. Thanks Kelvin 101 ( talk) 16:56, 15 March 2013 (UTC) reply
![[2]](/info/en/?search=File:Netflixenvelope.jpg){kind=link}
- 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.
File:Ray Burggraf installing new work.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Keep; OTRS now has a permission on file. Dianna ( talk) 21:18, 22 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- Derivative work of a "12' color construction". Stefan2 ( talk) 21:12, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Hi. This is a free work. The photo is licensed "Attribution, Share-Alike" in Flickr. Here's the required link: http://www.flickr.com/photos/93491844@N06/8557074911/ In addition, the photo was taken, published, and licensed with express permission from the artist. I can provide written proof from the artist, if necessary. If so, I would respectfully request instructions regarding how to do so. Thanks!!! Global Microscope ( talk) 22:45, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- https://secure.flickr.com/photos/93491844@N06/8557074911/ is Flickrwashing of https://secure.flickr.com/photos/buddhadog/7723094570/ -- Stefan2 ( talk) 22:51, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Yes, it's possible I erred in the route I chose to upload via the Wizard. The original Flickr source is George Clark, aka "Bhudhadog", a friend of our family. I am Ray Burggraf's daughter, and have an e-mail in my file from George (Bhudhadog), allowing me to publish the photo. The following, below I have copied directly from my e-mail,from buddhadog via Flickr (I have deleted personal information at the end of the message to protect his privacy:
"Hi Global Microscope!
buddhadog has sent you a message on Flickr. Subject: Re: Photos of Ray Burggraf Date: 24th February, 2013
Dear Elizabeth,
Well, what a surprise to receive this Flickr mail from you. You most certainly have my permission to use and post any of the photos that I have on Flickr.
Actually, I'm kind of old school and would like to talk with you over the phone if that is OK. I wanted to not only catch up on some things; but also tell you about some other photos that I have on Flickr. Please send me your phone number.
Sincerely and Towards Peace of Mind,
George Clark aka buddhadog"
Stefan, how would you recommend I proceed? Thanks!! Global Microscope ( talk) 23:05, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- You need to contact OTRS. See WP:CONSENT. In most cases, permission is needed from both the artist and the photographer. Since the artist appears on many of the photos, the aritst can't be the photographer. -- Stefan2 ( talk) 23:16, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Ummm....Actually, yes. Ray Burggraf takes photos of himself and his work using a time-delay on the digital camera. (He's complained to me several times about how difficult this is!) Anyway, I also have express permission from the artist (Ray Burggraf) to use the photos, and I think I can dig them up in my e-mail. If not, I'd be happy to have him send a new one. Should I contact him again, and have him send an e-mail directly to OTRS? (this is my first article...) Global Microscope ( talk) 23:20, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- I suggest that you ask Ray Burggraf to mail OTRS himself. -- Stefan2 ( talk) 00:47, 15 March 2013 (UTC) reply
OK thanks. OTRS should receive an e-mail from the artist (Ray Burggraf) in the next 24 - 48 hrs...depending upon whether or not he can put his paintbrush down long enough to answer the phone. :) Global Microscope ( talk) 16:45, 15 March 2013 (UTC) Update: Ray L. Burggraf has been successfully contacted, and anticipates sending authorization/documentation directly to OTRS withing 24 hrs or less. Global Microscope ( talk) 20:07, 15 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Update2: This evening (Friday, March 13), artist Ray L. Burggraf--the creator of the work depicted in the file, Ray_Burggraf_installing_new_work.jpg--sent an e-mail to the permissions-en division of Wikipedia. The message contains proof of identity including a link to his official website with contact info that matches the e-mail address of origin, received by Wikipedia. The message also assigns Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 to each work by Ray Burggraf, depicted in files uploaded by me (Global Microscope). OTRS has also received an e-mail containing permission from the original Flickr source in question, "buddhadog". Thank you very much for your assistance. Is there any other action you recommend at this time? Global Microscope ( talk) 02:00, 16 March 2013 (UTC) reply
(Good grief! Apologies about the date typo, above. Obviously today is the 16th...not the 13th. Thank goodness for the Wikipedia time stamp.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Global Microscope ( talk • contribs) 02:17, 16 March 2013 (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.
File:Chaudhry muhammad sarwar khan.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
23:02, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- This image has been deleted previously, although perhaps not under the identical name. The permission appears to be suspect given the EXIF data and the poor edging. If the uploader did take this photo of such significant subjects when they "covered the event through for a leading newspaper" then I would think it likely that they would be a professional photographer and would be able to produce a less ragged border and less skewed image within it. It may also be that the copyright resides with the newspaper rather than the photographer, although I know this is by no means always the case or perhaps even usually the case. OTRS is an absolute minimum requirement here but my gut suggests deletion as PUF.
Sitush (
talk)
21:40, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- Note: Previously added to the article on 19 Feb 2013 using the same file name. And also on 12 Jan 2013. I've not bothered looking back any further. - Sitush ( talk) 21:47, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Ray L. Burggraf, 2013, Tallahassee, FL.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Keep, as the OTRS team has now received the required permissions. Dianna ( talk) 21:22, 22 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- Derivative work of the artwork in the background. Stefan2 ( talk) 22:57, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Ray L. Burggraf has been successfully contacted, and anticipates sending authorization/documentation directly to OTRS withing 24 hrs or less. Global Microscope ( talk) 20:05, 15 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Update: This evening (Friday, March 13), artist Ray L. Burggraf--the creator of the work depicted in the file, File:Ray L. Burggraf, 2013, Tallahassee, FL.jpg--sent an e-mail to the permissions-en division of Wikipedia. The message contains proof of identity including a link to his official website with contact info that matches the e-mail address of origin, received by Wikipedia. The message also assigns Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 to each work by Ray Burggraf, depicted in files uploaded by me (Global Microscope). Thank you very much for your assistance. Global Microscope ( talk) 02:05, 16 March 2013 (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.
File:Ray L. Burggraf.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: keep, as the OTRS team has now received the required permissions. Dianna ( talk) 21:24, 22 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- File:Ray L. Burggraf.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Derivative work of the artwork in the background. Stefan2 ( talk) 22:57, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Ray L. Burggraf has been successfully contacted, and anticipates sending authorization/documentation directly to OTRS withing 24 hrs or less. Global Microscope ( talk) 20:07, 15 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Update: This evening (Friday, March 13), artist Ray L. Burggraf--the creator of the work depicted in the file, Ray L. Burggraf.jpg--sent an e-mail to the permissions-en division of Wikipedia. The message contains proof of identity including a link to his official website with contact info that matches the e-mail address of origin, received by Wikipedia. The message also assigns Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 to each work by Ray Burggraf, depicted in files uploaded by me (Global Microscope). Thank you very much for your assistance. Global Microscope ( talk) 02:07, 16 March 2013 (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.
File:Chengara Surendran.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Magog the Ogre (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
18:06, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Chengara Surendran.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- The image is on the subject's Lok Sabha biography page, so I think it's unlikely that the uploader took this photo. Dianna ( talk) 23:26, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Howard-Beswick.jpg.JPG
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Keep - the in-uniform-portrait appearance of the image means that it is very unlikely not to be an official US Navy photograph. In the unlikely event that we are incorrect about this, the rights holder may certainly let us know with another deletion request (at which point we will delete it in good faith) or via a DMCA takedown notice. Magog the Ogre ( t • c) 16:41, 14 April 2013 (UTC) reply
- File:Howard-Beswick.jpg.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- The uploader states that the photo was taken in 1920, but there's no evidence that the image was published before 1923 as claimed in the license template. We don't have an article on the person in the photo so there's no possibility for a fair-use claim.
Dianna (
talk)
23:31, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- It also says that it is {{ PD-USGov-Military-Navy}}. Unfortunately, the source doesn't tell where this particular photo comes from, although several of the other photos are credited to the navy. -- Stefan2 ( talk) 00:41, 15 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Please explain how it could ever be disputed when I provided extremely detailed traceability to and from this photograph (and all) which is from a free historical educational reference - just as I am doing with this entire page. IT is VITAL this information be shared and also that Wikipedia also verifies the accuracy of printed information as much as it appears to be with media. User:Rocketrosy VMURPHY 15-May-2013 20:39 EST
It also states he was the Commanding Officer and the First Flight Officer of United States Naval Air Station Sand Point Washington STATE. IT IS ABSOLUTELY A NAVAL PHOTOGRAPH AND HIS IS A WWl MEDAL OF HONOR, UNITED STATES NAVAL AVIATOR AWARDEE. HE WAS PULLED OUT OF RETIREMENT IN 1920 TO START THIS BASE. THIS PHOTOGRAPH IS FROM WHEN HE WAS AT THE START UP OF THIS COMMAND. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rocketrosy ( talk • contribs)
- It says that it was taken by the Navy, but there is no way to verify this claim. He may have been to a photographer outside the Navy.
- You added a template which says that this was published before 1923, but you didn't provide any evidence of this. If it was published in a book, then you need to indicate the title, author and year of publication. If it was published in a newspaper, then you need to include the name of the newspaper and the date of publication. Otherwise, your claims can't be verified. -- Stefan2 ( talk) 00:50, 16 March 2013 (UTC) reply
It was not published in a book or if it ever was, it is long long gone. I was lucky to locate this because of the fact the US really kept terrible records of WWl, which was the birth of US Naval Aviation. I gave the US Navy Museums (Washington DC, Pensacola, FL, United States Naval Academy, Annapolis, MD) one of the very first cruisebooks from World War l, only as recently as last year. The only reason I even had that was because a very kind person in Wexford, Ireland thought I would be able to share this - as I have. The only reason I was able to find this "free" photo was because I was able to discovery that Lt. Beswick was requested by the Secretary of the Navy to come out of retirement to start NAS Sand Point in 1920. It is very important that Mr. Beswick, Mr. Herbster, Mr. Garvey and all others are not forgotten like most were in the "Great War", which is more like the "Forgotten War" and it just should not be so...not ever. http://books.google.com/books?id=qsoLAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=BESWICK&f=false
http://www.historylink.org/_content/printer_friendly/pf_output.cfm?file_id=2249 - "HistoryLink.org is the first online encyclopedia of local and state history created expressly for the Internet. (SM) HistoryLink.org is a free public and educational resource produced by History Ink, a 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt corporation. Contact us by phone at 206.447.8140, by mail at Historylink, 1411 4th Ave. Suite 803, Seattle WA 98101 or email admin@historylink.org"
"Licensing: This essay is licensed under a Creative Commons license that encourages reproduction with attribution. Credit should be given to both HistoryLink.org and to the author, and sources must be included with any reproduction. Click the icon for more info. Please note that this Creative Commons license applies to text only, and not to images. For more information regarding individual photos or images, please contact the source noted in the image credit."
DATELESS IMAGE: U.S. Navy Lt. H. A. Beswick, first pilot instructor at Sand Point - Lt. Beswick's image on the free Library from the Washington State History, King County Library, Seattle Parks & Recreation Dept. HistoryLink File #2249 — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])
- CC-BY-NC-ND is not a free licence. -- Stefan2 ( talk) 12:54, 16 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Text of CC BY NC ND 3.0
|
|---|
|
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) This is a human-readable summary of the Legal Code (the full license). Disclaimer "You are free: to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work Under the following conditions:" Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). Noncommercial — You may not use this work for commercial purposes. No Derivative Works — You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work. With the understanding that: Waiver — Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder. Public Domain — Where the work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license. Other Rights — In no way are any of the following rights affected by the license: Your fair dealing or fair use rights, or other applicable copyright exceptions and limitations; The author's moral rights; Rights other persons may have either in the work itself or in how the work is used, such as publicity or privacy rights. Notice — For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. The best way to do this is with a link to this web page. "Use this license for your own work." This page is available in the following languages: Castellano Castellano (España) Català Deutsch English Esperanto français hrvatski Indonesia Italiano Nederlands Norsk polski Português Português (BR) Suomeksi svenska íslenska Ελληνικά русский українська 中文 華語 (台灣) 한국어 Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) This is a human-readable summary of the Legal Code (the full license). Disclaimer
Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). Noncommercial — You may not use this work for commercial purposes. No Derivative Works — You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work. With the understanding that: Waiver — Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder. Public Domain — Where the work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license. Other Rights — In no way are any of the following rights affected by the license: Your fair dealing or fair use rights, or other applicable copyright exceptions and limitations; The author's moral rights; Rights other persons may have either in the work itself or in how the work is used, such as publicity or privacy rights. Notice — For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. The best way to do this is with a link to this web page. Use this license for your own work. This page is available in the following languages: Castellano Castellano (España) Català Deutsch English Esperanto français hrvatski Indonesia Italiano Nederlands Norsk polski Português Português (BR) Suomeksi svenska íslenska Ελληνικά русский українська 中文 華語 (台灣) 한국어 |
- As
User:Stefan2 said above, this is not a suitable free licence. It contains a condition that makes it incompatible with Wikipedia policy. It's the line "Noncommercial — You may not use this work for commercial purposes." Wikipedia policy is that although Wikipedia is itself a non-commercial site that all images need to be freer than that and not limited to non-commercial re-use (see
Wikipedia:Image use policy#Free licenses). I do sympathise with the frustration this causes as most of us have been in similar positions with images that we really want to use but can't because we can't establish their copyright status.
NtheP (
talk)
23:17, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- None of that stuff is irrelevant - this image clearly doesn't have a Creative Commons license. If someone wants to contact the source website and ask them if they know if this image was either published before 1923 or published by the Navy, that's probably the only way this is getting resolved in a way that doesn't involve deleting the image. --
B (
talk)
20:37, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- In any case, the Historylink release statement quoted says "Please note that this Creative Commons license applies to text only, and not to images (my emphasis), For more information regarding individual photos or images, please contact the source noted in the image credit."
JohnCD (
talk)
18:45, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
reply
- They almost certainly don't own the image anyway. It's not their's to license. The one interesting thing is that on their page, they note that a lot of photos are "courtesy US Navy", but not this one. (Obviously, if it were from the US Navy, it's public domain.) So that makes me not want to say, "well, it's obviously a Navy photo - just go with it". -- B ( talk) 21:16, 10 April 2013 (UTC) reply
- In any case, the Historylink release statement quoted says "Please note that this Creative Commons license applies to text only, and not to images (my emphasis), For more information regarding individual photos or images, please contact the source noted in the image credit."
JohnCD (
talk)
18:45, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
reply
- None of that stuff is irrelevant - this image clearly doesn't have a Creative Commons license. If someone wants to contact the source website and ask them if they know if this image was either published before 1923 or published by the Navy, that's probably the only way this is getting resolved in a way that doesn't involve deleting the image. --
B (
talk)
20:37, 27 March 2013 (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.
File:Microsystems of a Child Model.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
B (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:15, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- We need to know the source and copyright status of each of the images in this composite before we can host this file here.
Dianna (
talk)
23:41, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- I found the neighborhood image at http://www.flickr.com/photos/22392855@N08/2851253255/in/set-72157624318938457 and it's marked as non-commercial only, so deleted. -- B ( talk) 20:25, 27 March 2013 (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.
- ^ "This is a human-readable summary of the Legal Code (the full license).DisclaimerYou are free: to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the workUnder the following conditions: Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). Noncommercial — You may not use this work for commercial purposes. No Derivative Works — You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work.With the understanding that: Waiver — Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder. Public Domain — Where the work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license. Other Rights — In no way are any of the following rights affected by the license: Your fair dealing or fair use rights, or other applicable copyright exceptions and limitations; The author's moral rights; Rights other persons may have either in the work itself or in how the work is used, such as publicity or privacy rights. Notice — For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. The best way to do this is with a link to this web page.Use this license for your own work.This page is available in the following languages:Castellano Castellano (España) Català Deutsch English Esperanto français hrvatski Indonesia Italiano Nederlands Norsk polski Português Português (BR) Suomeksi svenska íslenska Ελληνικά русский українська 中文 華語 (台灣) 한국어
March 14
File:Polo England 1915 circa.png
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Keep, with the addition of a fair use rationale. Dianna ( talk) 20:41, 22 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- File:Polo England 1915 circa.png ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- While this image "may" be from 1915 (although the source doesn't specify or hint at a date), but is, according to the source, an image from a private collection (note also the signatures on the picture, suggesting that this is a one-off). If this image wasn't published before 1923 (and we have evidence to suggest that it wasn't), and we don't know when the photographer died, then the image has to be assumed to be copyrighted. Fram ( talk) 15:15, 14 March 2013 (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. AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:10, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Frederick William Rowe.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Keep, with the adition of a fair use rationale. Dianna ( talk) 20:35, 22 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- File:Frederick William Rowe.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- File listed as being ca. 1910, without any evidence to support this. Image from findagrave, without prior source. Unknown whether this image was even published originally or not (which changes the copyright limits: if taken before 1923 but not published before 1923, the date of first publication comes into play here). There is a fair chance that the file is PD, but that isn't sufficient: we need certainty. Fram ( talk) 14:54, 14 March 2013 (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. AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:10, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Samuel Arthur Weiss.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Keep, with the addition of a fair use rationale. Dianna ( talk) 20:44, 22 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- File:Samuel Arthur Weiss.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- No evidence given at all for why this image would be public domain. Source is Findagrave, date is fairly probably post-1923 (subject is born in 1902), no evidence of who was the photographer or where this picture was first published. Nothing to support a PD license here. Fram ( talk) 14:26, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- Addendum: it seems possible that the Findagrave file was taken from [1]: that site gives a 1943 date. Fram ( talk) 14:46, 14 March 2013 (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. AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:09, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Fausto-Isidro-MEZAFLORES.png
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Fausto-Isidro-MEZAFLORES.png ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Yes the picture appeared in a US government document, however there is no proof that the picture it's self was taken by a US government agent, no mention in the article on him of ever being arrested in the US. LGA talk edits 07:51, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Persatuan Bolasepak Melayu Kedah Darul Aman.png
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Keep, with the addition of a fair use rationale. Dianna ( talk) 20:49, 22 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- The uploader claims to be the creator, but this is the logo of PB Melayu Kedah, a Malaysian football team. The same uploader also claimed to be the creator of File:Kedah United.png, which is the logo of a different Malaysian football team; that file description page has since been changed. — Bkell ( talk) 13:08, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Seasalt.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Seasalt.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Derivative work. See Commons:COM:CB#Product packaging. Stefan2 ( talk) 14:22, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Rough guide africanbluesCD.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Rough guide africanbluesCD.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Derivative work of a CD. Stefan2 ( talk) 14:36, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Peanut butter.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Peanut butter.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Derivative work. Stefan2 ( talk) 14:48, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:CommercialComposter.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:CommercialComposter.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- The text is in Dutch, but it doesn't say in which Dutch-speaking country this was taken. No freedom of panorama in Belgium. FOP status in Suriname unknown. Not clear if the posters are permanently installed as required by Dutch law. Stefan2 ( talk) 14:52, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Black Cardamom.JPG
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Black Cardamom.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- 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.
File:Black Onion Seed.JPG
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Black Onion Seed.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- 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.
File:Coriander Powder.JPG
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Coriander Powder.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- 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.
File:Ginger Powder.JPG
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Ginger Powder.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- 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.
File:Madras Curry Powder.JPG
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Madras Curry Powder.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- 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.
File:Aude red rice.JPG
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Aude red rice.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- 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.
File:Red Curry Paste.JPG
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Red Curry Paste.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- 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.
File:Barley Miso.JPG
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Barley Miso.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- 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.
File:Breakfast Tea.JPG
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Breakfast Tea.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- 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.
File:Don Freeman 1976 Press Release.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- Invalid licence claim. Is there a copyright notice somewhere in the press release? You can't see the back of it and it seems to have been cropped. Stefan2 ( talk) 16:13, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Bernardo Moya.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Bernardo Moya.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Appears everywhere on the Internet, for example here, but only in smaller resolution, it seems. Stefan2 ( talk) 16:17, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- a google search by image i agree, it's everwhere. I reported the uploader to AIV earlier today, after he removed csd tags twice. Aunva6 ( talk) 16:25, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Michael Acton Smith Portrait.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- Appears at lots of places everywhere on the Internet, although only in smaller resolution as far as I can see. No evidence that the uploader is Emilie Fjola Sandy who is listed as the copyright holder in the EXIF. Stefan2 ( talk) 19:02, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Lovefilm DVD Envelope.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Kept the new cropped version and deleted the larger version that included a copyright DVD. Dianna ( talk) 21:15, 22 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- File:Lovefilm DVD Envelope.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Derivative work of the disc and the envelope. Stefan2 ( talk) 19:09, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- Delete as even though the Lovefilm logo and envelope design are not copyrightable (fail threshold of originality) there is just enough copyrightable material on the DVD face in this image to make it a derivative work, a claim of fair use would fail as it can be replaced with an image containing a DVD with no copyrightable material on its face.
LGA
talk
edits
19:57, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- The stuff around the "PROBLEMS?" text is clearly copyrightable. --
Stefan2 (
talk)
20:58, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- Technically yes, but probably de minimis, but a FUR could be made for that. LGA talk edits 19:47, 15 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- The stuff around the "PROBLEMS?" text is clearly copyrightable. --
Stefan2 (
talk)
20:58, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- Keep the file has now been changed so it is just the Envelope and the disc is not show you can delete the previous version thanks Kelvin 101 ( talk) 20:30, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- If this is to be deleted you could say the same about this picture [2] which has been on here since 2006. Thanks Kelvin 101 ( talk) 16:56, 15 March 2013 (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.
File:Ray Burggraf installing new work.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Keep; OTRS now has a permission on file. Dianna ( talk) 21:18, 22 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- Derivative work of a "12' color construction". Stefan2 ( talk) 21:12, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Hi. This is a free work. The photo is licensed "Attribution, Share-Alike" in Flickr. Here's the required link: http://www.flickr.com/photos/93491844@N06/8557074911/ In addition, the photo was taken, published, and licensed with express permission from the artist. I can provide written proof from the artist, if necessary. If so, I would respectfully request instructions regarding how to do so. Thanks!!! Global Microscope ( talk) 22:45, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- https://secure.flickr.com/photos/93491844@N06/8557074911/ is Flickrwashing of https://secure.flickr.com/photos/buddhadog/7723094570/ -- Stefan2 ( talk) 22:51, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Yes, it's possible I erred in the route I chose to upload via the Wizard. The original Flickr source is George Clark, aka "Bhudhadog", a friend of our family. I am Ray Burggraf's daughter, and have an e-mail in my file from George (Bhudhadog), allowing me to publish the photo. The following, below I have copied directly from my e-mail,from buddhadog via Flickr (I have deleted personal information at the end of the message to protect his privacy:
"Hi Global Microscope!
buddhadog has sent you a message on Flickr. Subject: Re: Photos of Ray Burggraf Date: 24th February, 2013
Dear Elizabeth,
Well, what a surprise to receive this Flickr mail from you. You most certainly have my permission to use and post any of the photos that I have on Flickr.
Actually, I'm kind of old school and would like to talk with you over the phone if that is OK. I wanted to not only catch up on some things; but also tell you about some other photos that I have on Flickr. Please send me your phone number.
Sincerely and Towards Peace of Mind,
George Clark aka buddhadog"
Stefan, how would you recommend I proceed? Thanks!! Global Microscope ( talk) 23:05, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- You need to contact OTRS. See WP:CONSENT. In most cases, permission is needed from both the artist and the photographer. Since the artist appears on many of the photos, the aritst can't be the photographer. -- Stefan2 ( talk) 23:16, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Ummm....Actually, yes. Ray Burggraf takes photos of himself and his work using a time-delay on the digital camera. (He's complained to me several times about how difficult this is!) Anyway, I also have express permission from the artist (Ray Burggraf) to use the photos, and I think I can dig them up in my e-mail. If not, I'd be happy to have him send a new one. Should I contact him again, and have him send an e-mail directly to OTRS? (this is my first article...) Global Microscope ( talk) 23:20, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- I suggest that you ask Ray Burggraf to mail OTRS himself. -- Stefan2 ( talk) 00:47, 15 March 2013 (UTC) reply
OK thanks. OTRS should receive an e-mail from the artist (Ray Burggraf) in the next 24 - 48 hrs...depending upon whether or not he can put his paintbrush down long enough to answer the phone. :) Global Microscope ( talk) 16:45, 15 March 2013 (UTC) Update: Ray L. Burggraf has been successfully contacted, and anticipates sending authorization/documentation directly to OTRS withing 24 hrs or less. Global Microscope ( talk) 20:07, 15 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Update2: This evening (Friday, March 13), artist Ray L. Burggraf--the creator of the work depicted in the file, Ray_Burggraf_installing_new_work.jpg--sent an e-mail to the permissions-en division of Wikipedia. The message contains proof of identity including a link to his official website with contact info that matches the e-mail address of origin, received by Wikipedia. The message also assigns Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 to each work by Ray Burggraf, depicted in files uploaded by me (Global Microscope). OTRS has also received an e-mail containing permission from the original Flickr source in question, "buddhadog". Thank you very much for your assistance. Is there any other action you recommend at this time? Global Microscope ( talk) 02:00, 16 March 2013 (UTC) reply
(Good grief! Apologies about the date typo, above. Obviously today is the 16th...not the 13th. Thank goodness for the Wikipedia time stamp.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Global Microscope ( talk • contribs) 02:17, 16 March 2013 (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.
File:Chaudhry muhammad sarwar khan.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Diannaa (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
23:02, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- This image has been deleted previously, although perhaps not under the identical name. The permission appears to be suspect given the EXIF data and the poor edging. If the uploader did take this photo of such significant subjects when they "covered the event through for a leading newspaper" then I would think it likely that they would be a professional photographer and would be able to produce a less ragged border and less skewed image within it. It may also be that the copyright resides with the newspaper rather than the photographer, although I know this is by no means always the case or perhaps even usually the case. OTRS is an absolute minimum requirement here but my gut suggests deletion as PUF.
Sitush (
talk)
21:40, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- Note: Previously added to the article on 19 Feb 2013 using the same file name. And also on 12 Jan 2013. I've not bothered looking back any further. - Sitush ( talk) 21:47, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Ray L. Burggraf, 2013, Tallahassee, FL.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Keep, as the OTRS team has now received the required permissions. Dianna ( talk) 21:22, 22 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- Derivative work of the artwork in the background. Stefan2 ( talk) 22:57, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Ray L. Burggraf has been successfully contacted, and anticipates sending authorization/documentation directly to OTRS withing 24 hrs or less. Global Microscope ( talk) 20:05, 15 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Update: This evening (Friday, March 13), artist Ray L. Burggraf--the creator of the work depicted in the file, File:Ray L. Burggraf, 2013, Tallahassee, FL.jpg--sent an e-mail to the permissions-en division of Wikipedia. The message contains proof of identity including a link to his official website with contact info that matches the e-mail address of origin, received by Wikipedia. The message also assigns Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 to each work by Ray Burggraf, depicted in files uploaded by me (Global Microscope). Thank you very much for your assistance. Global Microscope ( talk) 02:05, 16 March 2013 (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.
File:Ray L. Burggraf.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: keep, as the OTRS team has now received the required permissions. Dianna ( talk) 21:24, 22 March 2013 (UTC) reply
- File:Ray L. Burggraf.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- Derivative work of the artwork in the background. Stefan2 ( talk) 22:57, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Ray L. Burggraf has been successfully contacted, and anticipates sending authorization/documentation directly to OTRS withing 24 hrs or less. Global Microscope ( talk) 20:07, 15 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Update: This evening (Friday, March 13), artist Ray L. Burggraf--the creator of the work depicted in the file, Ray L. Burggraf.jpg--sent an e-mail to the permissions-en division of Wikipedia. The message contains proof of identity including a link to his official website with contact info that matches the e-mail address of origin, received by Wikipedia. The message also assigns Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 to each work by Ray Burggraf, depicted in files uploaded by me (Global Microscope). Thank you very much for your assistance. Global Microscope ( talk) 02:07, 16 March 2013 (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.
File:Chengara Surendran.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
Magog the Ogre (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
18:06, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
reply
- File:Chengara Surendran.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- The image is on the subject's Lok Sabha biography page, so I think it's unlikely that the uploader took this photo. Dianna ( talk) 23:26, 14 March 2013 (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.
File:Howard-Beswick.jpg.JPG
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Keep - the in-uniform-portrait appearance of the image means that it is very unlikely not to be an official US Navy photograph. In the unlikely event that we are incorrect about this, the rights holder may certainly let us know with another deletion request (at which point we will delete it in good faith) or via a DMCA takedown notice. Magog the Ogre ( t • c) 16:41, 14 April 2013 (UTC) reply
- File:Howard-Beswick.jpg.JPG ( delete | talk | history | logs).
- The uploader states that the photo was taken in 1920, but there's no evidence that the image was published before 1923 as claimed in the license template. We don't have an article on the person in the photo so there's no possibility for a fair-use claim.
Dianna (
talk)
23:31, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- It also says that it is {{ PD-USGov-Military-Navy}}. Unfortunately, the source doesn't tell where this particular photo comes from, although several of the other photos are credited to the navy. -- Stefan2 ( talk) 00:41, 15 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Please explain how it could ever be disputed when I provided extremely detailed traceability to and from this photograph (and all) which is from a free historical educational reference - just as I am doing with this entire page. IT is VITAL this information be shared and also that Wikipedia also verifies the accuracy of printed information as much as it appears to be with media. User:Rocketrosy VMURPHY 15-May-2013 20:39 EST
It also states he was the Commanding Officer and the First Flight Officer of United States Naval Air Station Sand Point Washington STATE. IT IS ABSOLUTELY A NAVAL PHOTOGRAPH AND HIS IS A WWl MEDAL OF HONOR, UNITED STATES NAVAL AVIATOR AWARDEE. HE WAS PULLED OUT OF RETIREMENT IN 1920 TO START THIS BASE. THIS PHOTOGRAPH IS FROM WHEN HE WAS AT THE START UP OF THIS COMMAND. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rocketrosy ( talk • contribs)
- It says that it was taken by the Navy, but there is no way to verify this claim. He may have been to a photographer outside the Navy.
- You added a template which says that this was published before 1923, but you didn't provide any evidence of this. If it was published in a book, then you need to indicate the title, author and year of publication. If it was published in a newspaper, then you need to include the name of the newspaper and the date of publication. Otherwise, your claims can't be verified. -- Stefan2 ( talk) 00:50, 16 March 2013 (UTC) reply
It was not published in a book or if it ever was, it is long long gone. I was lucky to locate this because of the fact the US really kept terrible records of WWl, which was the birth of US Naval Aviation. I gave the US Navy Museums (Washington DC, Pensacola, FL, United States Naval Academy, Annapolis, MD) one of the very first cruisebooks from World War l, only as recently as last year. The only reason I even had that was because a very kind person in Wexford, Ireland thought I would be able to share this - as I have. The only reason I was able to find this "free" photo was because I was able to discovery that Lt. Beswick was requested by the Secretary of the Navy to come out of retirement to start NAS Sand Point in 1920. It is very important that Mr. Beswick, Mr. Herbster, Mr. Garvey and all others are not forgotten like most were in the "Great War", which is more like the "Forgotten War" and it just should not be so...not ever. http://books.google.com/books?id=qsoLAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=BESWICK&f=false
http://www.historylink.org/_content/printer_friendly/pf_output.cfm?file_id=2249 - "HistoryLink.org is the first online encyclopedia of local and state history created expressly for the Internet. (SM) HistoryLink.org is a free public and educational resource produced by History Ink, a 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt corporation. Contact us by phone at 206.447.8140, by mail at Historylink, 1411 4th Ave. Suite 803, Seattle WA 98101 or email admin@historylink.org"
"Licensing: This essay is licensed under a Creative Commons license that encourages reproduction with attribution. Credit should be given to both HistoryLink.org and to the author, and sources must be included with any reproduction. Click the icon for more info. Please note that this Creative Commons license applies to text only, and not to images. For more information regarding individual photos or images, please contact the source noted in the image credit."
DATELESS IMAGE: U.S. Navy Lt. H. A. Beswick, first pilot instructor at Sand Point - Lt. Beswick's image on the free Library from the Washington State History, King County Library, Seattle Parks & Recreation Dept. HistoryLink File #2249 — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])
- CC-BY-NC-ND is not a free licence. -- Stefan2 ( talk) 12:54, 16 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Text of CC BY NC ND 3.0
|
|---|
|
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) This is a human-readable summary of the Legal Code (the full license). Disclaimer "You are free: to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work Under the following conditions:" Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). Noncommercial — You may not use this work for commercial purposes. No Derivative Works — You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work. With the understanding that: Waiver — Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder. Public Domain — Where the work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license. Other Rights — In no way are any of the following rights affected by the license: Your fair dealing or fair use rights, or other applicable copyright exceptions and limitations; The author's moral rights; Rights other persons may have either in the work itself or in how the work is used, such as publicity or privacy rights. Notice — For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. The best way to do this is with a link to this web page. "Use this license for your own work." This page is available in the following languages: Castellano Castellano (España) Català Deutsch English Esperanto français hrvatski Indonesia Italiano Nederlands Norsk polski Português Português (BR) Suomeksi svenska íslenska Ελληνικά русский українська 中文 華語 (台灣) 한국어 Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) This is a human-readable summary of the Legal Code (the full license). Disclaimer
Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). Noncommercial — You may not use this work for commercial purposes. No Derivative Works — You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work. With the understanding that: Waiver — Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder. Public Domain — Where the work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license. Other Rights — In no way are any of the following rights affected by the license: Your fair dealing or fair use rights, or other applicable copyright exceptions and limitations; The author's moral rights; Rights other persons may have either in the work itself or in how the work is used, such as publicity or privacy rights. Notice — For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. The best way to do this is with a link to this web page. Use this license for your own work. This page is available in the following languages: Castellano Castellano (España) Català Deutsch English Esperanto français hrvatski Indonesia Italiano Nederlands Norsk polski Português Português (BR) Suomeksi svenska íslenska Ελληνικά русский українська 中文 華語 (台灣) 한국어 |
- As
User:Stefan2 said above, this is not a suitable free licence. It contains a condition that makes it incompatible with Wikipedia policy. It's the line "Noncommercial — You may not use this work for commercial purposes." Wikipedia policy is that although Wikipedia is itself a non-commercial site that all images need to be freer than that and not limited to non-commercial re-use (see
Wikipedia:Image use policy#Free licenses). I do sympathise with the frustration this causes as most of us have been in similar positions with images that we really want to use but can't because we can't establish their copyright status.
NtheP (
talk)
23:17, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- None of that stuff is irrelevant - this image clearly doesn't have a Creative Commons license. If someone wants to contact the source website and ask them if they know if this image was either published before 1923 or published by the Navy, that's probably the only way this is getting resolved in a way that doesn't involve deleting the image. --
B (
talk)
20:37, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- In any case, the Historylink release statement quoted says "Please note that this Creative Commons license applies to text only, and not to images (my emphasis), For more information regarding individual photos or images, please contact the source noted in the image credit."
JohnCD (
talk)
18:45, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
reply
- They almost certainly don't own the image anyway. It's not their's to license. The one interesting thing is that on their page, they note that a lot of photos are "courtesy US Navy", but not this one. (Obviously, if it were from the US Navy, it's public domain.) So that makes me not want to say, "well, it's obviously a Navy photo - just go with it". -- B ( talk) 21:16, 10 April 2013 (UTC) reply
- In any case, the Historylink release statement quoted says "Please note that this Creative Commons license applies to text only, and not to images (my emphasis), For more information regarding individual photos or images, please contact the source noted in the image credit."
JohnCD (
talk)
18:45, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
reply
- None of that stuff is irrelevant - this image clearly doesn't have a Creative Commons license. If someone wants to contact the source website and ask them if they know if this image was either published before 1923 or published by the Navy, that's probably the only way this is getting resolved in a way that doesn't involve deleting the image. --
B (
talk)
20:37, 27 March 2013 (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.
File:Microsystems of a Child Model.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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
B (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡
22:15, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- We need to know the source and copyright status of each of the images in this composite before we can host this file here.
Dianna (
talk)
23:41, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
- I found the neighborhood image at http://www.flickr.com/photos/22392855@N08/2851253255/in/set-72157624318938457 and it's marked as non-commercial only, so deleted. -- B ( talk) 20:25, 27 March 2013 (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.
- ^ "This is a human-readable summary of the Legal Code (the full license).DisclaimerYou are free: to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the workUnder the following conditions: Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). Noncommercial — You may not use this work for commercial purposes. No Derivative Works — You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work.With the understanding that: Waiver — Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder. Public Domain — Where the work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license. Other Rights — In no way are any of the following rights affected by the license: Your fair dealing or fair use rights, or other applicable copyright exceptions and limitations; The author's moral rights; Rights other persons may have either in the work itself or in how the work is used, such as publicity or privacy rights. Notice — For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. The best way to do this is with a link to this web page.Use this license for your own work.This page is available in the following languages:Castellano Castellano (España) Català Deutsch English Esperanto français hrvatski Indonesia Italiano Nederlands Norsk polski Português Português (BR) Suomeksi svenska íslenska Ελληνικά русский українська 中文 華語 (台灣) 한국어