From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

September 15

File:Clive Brook.jpg

File:Documentary Filmmaker Navalpreet Rangi.jpg

File:No Secrets KCA 2002.jpg

File:JessiMalayRolePlayConcert.jpg

File:Jessi Malay Album Cover.jpg

File:Texas Master Peace Officer badge.png

File:Bhagat Singh 1922.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: Delete Nthep ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)

File:Bhagat Singh 1922.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
Delete This photo was deleted from Commons. From the discussion at Commons, it was not published before 1947, which in turn means that while it may be PD in India, it is not PD in the US due to the URAA. For it to be PD in the US the image should have been in the public domain in India by 1996, ie. published in India before 1941, which is apparently not the case. — RP88 ( talk) 17:58, 15 November 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:Pragathicoimbatore.png

File:AvtoportretG.jpg

File:Dvanadciat'.jpg

File:Sviato kartopli.jpg

File:Ecuador'a 20S Banknote, Anverse, Reverse 1240px.jpg

File:Eleanor of Guelders.jpg

File:Usarray_installation_plan.jpg

File:Fauth.jpg

File:Washington-bible.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 Bible is not available for photography, and there's no consensus to delete the image. The image has now been tagged as Fair Use. Diannaa ( talk) 15:48, 15 November 2013 (UTC) reply

File:Washington-bible.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
  • This photograph is of a book as a three dimensional object, so the rationale behind it being PD for being 2D and already public domain is flawed.  —  Crisco 1492 ( talk) 22:37, 15 September 2013 (UTC) reply
  • So why not just change it to the rationale for a 3-D object? Jack1956 ( talk) 07:23, 16 September 2013 (UTC) reply
    • Because photos of 3D object require permission from the photographer. There is no evidence that the photographer has granted any permission here. -- Stefan2 ( talk) 14:09, 16 September 2013 (UTC) reply
      • So why don't photos of 2D works of art need permission from the photographer? Isn't use of it with a 3D tag covered by this?: "Per § 107 it is believed that reproduction for criticism, comment, teaching and scholarship constitutes fair use and does not infringe copyright. It is believed that the use of a picture to illustrate the three-dimensional work of art in question, on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law." Jack1956 ( talk) 14:44, 16 September 2013 (UTC) reply
        • Replaceable fair use is what you're pushing for. This book appears to be open for public viewing, so a new picture could still be taken. 2D does not require permission as the US does not recognise sweat of brow as a rationale for copyright: the act of faithfully scanning a 2D object does not reach the threshold of creativity required for the US copyright law. 3D objects, on the other hand, take on additional considerations of angles, lighting, etc. which all help it pass the necessary creativity to draw a new copyright. —  Crisco 1492 ( talk) 14:59, 16 September 2013 (UTC) reply
  • The Bible is not open for public viewing. As the Bible of a Masonic Lodge, and one of America's most important and precious documents, it is kept securely locked away. Because of its fragility it is not opened anymore including at any state occasions or lodge ceremony at which it may be used. The image therefore is irreplacable, especially as it shows the Bible open. Jack1956 ( talk) 17:38, 16 September 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 11:36, 17 September 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:EysenckPersonalityTypes.gif

File:FOSI logo, Indonesian Sedimentologists Forum.jpg

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

September 15

File:Clive Brook.jpg

File:Documentary Filmmaker Navalpreet Rangi.jpg

File:No Secrets KCA 2002.jpg

File:JessiMalayRolePlayConcert.jpg

File:Jessi Malay Album Cover.jpg

File:Texas Master Peace Officer badge.png

File:Bhagat Singh 1922.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: Delete Nthep ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)

File:Bhagat Singh 1922.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
Delete This photo was deleted from Commons. From the discussion at Commons, it was not published before 1947, which in turn means that while it may be PD in India, it is not PD in the US due to the URAA. For it to be PD in the US the image should have been in the public domain in India by 1996, ie. published in India before 1941, which is apparently not the case. — RP88 ( talk) 17:58, 15 November 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:Pragathicoimbatore.png

File:AvtoportretG.jpg

File:Dvanadciat'.jpg

File:Sviato kartopli.jpg

File:Ecuador'a 20S Banknote, Anverse, Reverse 1240px.jpg

File:Eleanor of Guelders.jpg

File:Usarray_installation_plan.jpg

File:Fauth.jpg

File:Washington-bible.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 Bible is not available for photography, and there's no consensus to delete the image. The image has now been tagged as Fair Use. Diannaa ( talk) 15:48, 15 November 2013 (UTC) reply

File:Washington-bible.jpg ( delete | talk | history | logs).
  • This photograph is of a book as a three dimensional object, so the rationale behind it being PD for being 2D and already public domain is flawed.  —  Crisco 1492 ( talk) 22:37, 15 September 2013 (UTC) reply
  • So why not just change it to the rationale for a 3-D object? Jack1956 ( talk) 07:23, 16 September 2013 (UTC) reply
    • Because photos of 3D object require permission from the photographer. There is no evidence that the photographer has granted any permission here. -- Stefan2 ( talk) 14:09, 16 September 2013 (UTC) reply
      • So why don't photos of 2D works of art need permission from the photographer? Isn't use of it with a 3D tag covered by this?: "Per § 107 it is believed that reproduction for criticism, comment, teaching and scholarship constitutes fair use and does not infringe copyright. It is believed that the use of a picture to illustrate the three-dimensional work of art in question, on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law." Jack1956 ( talk) 14:44, 16 September 2013 (UTC) reply
        • Replaceable fair use is what you're pushing for. This book appears to be open for public viewing, so a new picture could still be taken. 2D does not require permission as the US does not recognise sweat of brow as a rationale for copyright: the act of faithfully scanning a 2D object does not reach the threshold of creativity required for the US copyright law. 3D objects, on the other hand, take on additional considerations of angles, lighting, etc. which all help it pass the necessary creativity to draw a new copyright. —  Crisco 1492 ( talk) 14:59, 16 September 2013 (UTC) reply
  • The Bible is not open for public viewing. As the Bible of a Masonic Lodge, and one of America's most important and precious documents, it is kept securely locked away. Because of its fragility it is not opened anymore including at any state occasions or lodge ceremony at which it may be used. The image therefore is irreplacable, especially as it shows the Bible open. Jack1956 ( talk) 17:38, 16 September 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 11:36, 17 September 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:EysenckPersonalityTypes.gif

File:FOSI logo, Indonesian Sedimentologists Forum.jpg


Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook