Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2007/01

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Gargamel.jpg

Representation of Smurf character Gargamel, created by cartoonist Peyo (d. 1992). The picture falls under Commons:Derivative works and cannot be licensed under the GFDL. --Jastrow (Λέγετε) 16:21, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Delete DW -- Bryan (talk to me) 21:28, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
•  Delete as per nominator. Siebrand 14:03, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
• What about the right to pastiche or caricature existing in France or Germany? Oxam Hartog 21:28, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

   Comment. This right is subordinate to the clear mention of author and source, which is not the case here. Besides, there must be no possible confusion with the original content, which is not the case here IMO: fact is this picture is (was) used to illustrate articles about Gargamel without any warning whatsoever. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 21:49, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

  I am not ok with the POV about clear mention of author and source . often pastiche but more caricature are used in owner works (comics, movies) where spectator has to find itself the references. However in the present case I can understand the claim about derivation. Oxam Hartog 22:39, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

  Re: your 1st point, that's what I gather from [1]. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 22:59, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

  It's not the same case. The judgment publication insist strongly than a lot of pages were used, not a single image. Here a page about pastiches of Tintin. Author spécify it's better if the diffusion of work is not too large. On Commons the rule is a large diffusion possible also it's perharps better to delete this pic or strongly mentioned in description the reference to pastiche. It's quite funny but on fr: a pic is in delation request about almost similar problem here. Oxam Hartog 23:58, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted by User:VIGNERON --ALE! ¿…? 10:22, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Paintings by Chen Cheng-po

Artist died in 1947, copyright is still valid. A.J. 12:50, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete A.J. 12:52, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep The picture is at least under the "PD-China"-License which is more liberal than the Western ones: The Copyright ends already 50 years after the death of the painter.--Dr. Meierhofer 16:44, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Did Mr. Cheng-po paint in China only? A.J. 21:21, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
    • I'm not sure, but in his Wiki-Article I haven't found any hint that he had lived abroad for a longer period. As far as I can seen, there are many pictures of Cheng at the Wiki-Commons without having been disputed ...--Dr. Meierhofer 21:03, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
      • I'm not suprised. Many obvious copyright violation lasted survive many years, there are even more not so obvius (like this case). A.J. 14:46, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep : Chen Cheng-po was a taiwanese painter born and dead in Taiwan. Taiwan’s Copyright legislation is 50 years after the creator’s death except for works firstly published between 40 to 50 years after the creator’s death, where their copyright period run during 10 years. license has to be changed in {{PD-old-china}} (or something like that, to be created) Oxam Hartog 22:12, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
• Comment: Don't know if this is relevant: Chen was a subject of the Empire of Japan for all but 2 years of his life. A-giâu 02:50, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. see {{PD-China}}. Use [[{{PD-old-50}}? --Shizhao 03:00, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
  • PD-old-50, needs proof that the painting was actually published in US before that date. A.J. 08:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept: different copyright timeout in China, license updated to {{PD-China}}. A.J. 08:50, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Fanmeilemuenchen.jpg

bad quality, blurry --Patricia.fidi 13:24, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

My first instinct was to agree with the deletion as it is quite blurry, but this appears to be a photo of a specific 2006 World Cup celebration and used to illustrate an article on de wiki. Since it's useful enough to appear in an article and since getting a better replacement is unlikely, I'd say to  Keep. Carl Lindberg 09:48, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Keep Used on german wiki article --Astrokey44 22:49, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
•  Keep Not a reason for deletion. // Liftarn

Kept -- Bryan (talk to me) 10:16, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Rent-a-bike.JPG

bad quality, blurry --Patricia.fidi 13:28, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

It's a little bit blurry, but far better than nothing. Is there a better equivalent image? If not,  Keep. Carl Lindberg 09:49, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Keep Not a reason for deletion. // Liftarn

Kept -- Bryan (talk to me) 10:16, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Gulf of Bothnia off Ii.jpg

There's no visible image, although it is supposed to be asatellite image on the Gulf of Bothnia. TeVe 10:29, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I can see the image all right on the Wikicommons page, but maybe there is indeed some error. --MPorciusCato 10:41, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:08, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Europe location TUR2.png

This file uses the old series maps with wrong borders in the East. Further the file is redundant to Image:Europe location TUR.png and Image:Asia location TUR.png --David Liuzzo 15:57, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep As the uploader, I shall state that I was not informed of this deletion request by the nominator, as requested in the guideline. I do not agree that the map is made obsolete by Image:Europe location TUR.png (since on which almost half of the subject country is covered by a legend) and Image:Asia location TUR.png (showing the country with reference to a different region). Nevertheless, this image ceased to be used as the locator map for en:Turkey (the main reason of its creation), since it currently represents an obsolete design. Given it is not redundant to another image, I do not see why it should be deleted from Commons and I think it remains potentially usable on Wikimedia projects. I do not certainly see any wrong borders in the image, but any factual inaccuracy can be corrected if the problem is clearly stated. Regards, AtilimGunesBaydin 16:57, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep per Atilim.. Baristarim 03:11, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

I as creator of the source material for this image should state that it this image violated the common design scheme of both, the old and new Europe location design scheme by marking Turkey that way. See for example Image:Europelocation_England.PNG which marks which concentrates on the relevant territory of England while leaving the rest of Great Britain it in a paler coler or (in the new series) Image:Europe_location_RUS.png which highlights both EU & Asian territory in different colors.

Europe location TUR2.png implies that the whole of Turkey would lie in Europe which is actually considered wrong. Either there have to be used two colors or the marking of the continent as in the location map Image:Europe location AZN.png has to be cleared out. By the way, this is also valid for Image:Asia location TUR.png, so that this image also will either be adapted soon or requested for deletion, too. I apologize for not informing you of this request, but the implementation of the new 2007 series which I made on New Year's day was just so labour intensive that I forgot about it.

The wrong borders in the East can be seen at the border of Europe/Asia along the Ural river. This has been corrected in the new map series. The old images showing the wrong borderd will either be corrected/replaced by the new series or requested for deletion. --David Liuzzo 17:26, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. My intention for creating this derivative work was to illustrate Turkey's geographical location with reference to the European continent. I do not agree that the coloring in the image necessarily implies that the whole country is situated on the European continent, but I now see that it's somewhat ambiguous and could be interpreted that way by individuals without a knowledge of geography. I also notice now the problem with the boundary along the Ural river. One possible solution for both problems would be to remove the gray shading from the image, which I'm going to attempt now. I'm also truly sorry that you somehow feel a "violation", I wish you had contacted me about your concerns. Regards, AtilimGunesBaydin 22:09, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Also, thanks for noticing the exact same problem with Image:Asia location TUR.png. Since you are the creator of that image, I guess I can make a request that you make a correction instead of nominating for deletion. AtilimGunesBaydin 22:13, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

The removement of the grey shading makes the map acceptable. There will be a new version of the Asia image, as well as new maps for other countries for that area. But I do not have any time for major enterprises at the moment.--David Liuzzo 22:26, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept -- Bryan (talk to me) 13:41, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:E3-ps3system.jpg

According to the site from which the image comes from, the owner reserves copyright on its content.[2] There is no evidence that Cabel Sasser has released the image into the public domain. The uploader of this image has uploaded copyrighted images before, claiming them to be in the public domain when they aren't, and continued to do so after being warned not to do so anymore. Dancter 16:28, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete -- Bryan (talk to me) 21:28, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not seeing that particular image on the page you refer to, but inclined towards deletion given the pattern of bad contributions and stonewalling. —LX (talk, contribs) 14:46, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about that. Under the "PlayStation 3" heading, in the second paragraph, click on the phrase "undoubtedly huge", and you'll see the image pop up. Regardless, pretty much every page on the site features the text "©2006 Cabel Sasser" at the bottom, and there is no reason to believe that it doesn't apply to images from the site. Dancter 15:53, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete then. —LX (talk, contribs) 17:27, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted -- Bryan (talk to me) 13:37, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:(5).jpg

The only possible purpose of this picture is vandalism. Wutschwlllm 22:24, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted. In the future speedy such images. --Cat out 23:29, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Notre-Dame de Montréal Basilica Jan 2006.jpg

(Very) unfortunately the author was required to say a waiver before taking this photo, saying it was for non-commercial use, as is required in the building when you use a tripod. Discussed at en:Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Notre dame basillica delist. ed g2s • talk 16:16, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete This is a damn good picture. It should not get lost, I recommend the uploader to share it somewhere else :( -- Bryan (talk to me) 21:23, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted by User:Fir0002 --ALE! ¿…? 13:59, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Du stinkst.svg

wrong size and name (uploaded by me) --Bangin ¤ ρø$τ 17:47, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Please use {{bad name}} -- Bryan (talk to me) 21:21, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted by User:SB Johnny --ALE! ¿…? 10:08, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Stapp Hi-G Deceleration1.jpg

OTRS complaint #2007010210018552: it is claimed that the image is not PD-USGov, but instead a private photograph given to the Edwards Air Force Base history office for their use. The sourcing given in the image description page is inadequate to verify either claim. --Carnildo 22:21, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete if the OTRS complaint looks only the slightest bit credible (and I assume it does, otherwise this wouldn't have ended up here). A possible public domain replacement image is available at [3]. (U.S. Air Force image) Lupo 12:29, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted by User:David.Monniaux --ALE! ¿…? 10:22, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Sju chakrana.jpg

Possible copyright violation. Appears to be scanned from a book. The uploader was asked to confirm that he/she is the original author a month ago and has not commented on the issue. —LX (talk, contribs) 09:32, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Delete / Fred Chess 23:51, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted as a likely copyvio. Kjetil_r 03:09, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Kooikerhondje edited.jpg

beautiful job but dog is blurry... --Patricia.fidi 21:47, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep no reason for deletion. Siebrand 21:17, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep per Siebrand -- Bryan (talk to me) 12:03, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Keep Not a reason for deletion. // Liftarn

Kept, not a reason for deletion. Kjetil_r 03:00, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Kooikerhondje.jpg

beautiful job but dog is blurry... --Patricia.fidi 21:50, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep no reason for deletion Siebrand 21:17, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep per Siebrand -- Bryan (talk to me) 12:03, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Keep Not a reason for deletion. // Liftarn

Kept, not a reason for deletion. Kjetil_r 03:02, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Kooikerhondje.jpg

Author has requested deletion for emotional reasons --BesselDekker 05:32, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

What reasons? This image is actually used on a few articles. Skander 15:24, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

 Comment: there's a duplicate of this picture (Image:Kooiker0092c.jpg) as well. Several other pictures of this breed are available: Kooikerhondje. NielsF ^{? (en, nl, fr, it)} 15:36, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

 Keep What? --Dezidor 13:20, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

 Delete Image is replaceable and I think we should honor such deletion requests. -- Bryan (talk to me) 15:01, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

 Delete per nom / Bryan. Original uploader is a longstanding and valuable contributor at nl:. NielsF ^{? (en, nl, fr, it)} 22:23, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

 Delete Honor request. - .Aiko 14:58, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Erica.jpg

websource says "Prohibida su reproducción total o parcial © Copyright 2006,Terra Networks, S.A.". --JD {æ} 23:45, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Which, without knowing any Spanish, I presume means "reproduction in part or whole is prohibited," which is not consistent with Template:Copyrighted free use. Obvious copyvio.  Delete. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:14, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted as a copyvio. Kjetil_r 02:59, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Erica.jpg

Image appears to be outside of Commons scope (unused, no description). -- Siebrand 09:27, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

•  Delete - not on project scope. There's also Image:Erca4.jpg. Dantadd✉ 19:44, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

deleted, --Polarlys 12:57, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:A delicious meal.jpg

Inappropriate content. Username9 14:55, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete Inappropriate, orphan, and does not even look like an actual photograph. Dar-Ape 03:12, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Second the last: It's a very poor photoshop job. I also suspect that, with that name, it was created/uploaded solely to disrupt. 68.39.174.238 10:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete. This really belongs in the speedy bin. —LX (talk, contribs) 14:51, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted, used for disruption of Wikipedia/Commons. Kjetil_r 03:04, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Blue Division 263 Regiment.jpg

copyvio: photographer unknown, no official work by German federal or state authority, not PD-old, taken 1941. Taxman^(de) 20:31, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete There is no such thing as "work by the German government, thus PD" in Germany. {{PD-GermanGov}} does not cover photographic works. --Matt314 20:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete No reason for PD. -- Bryan (talk to me) 21:20, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete Mal wieder eine eindeutige Urheberrechtsverletzung. --Steschke 23:22, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete, not PD at all. 70 years is not yet up yet and the law does not include photos. Terence Ong 08:05, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:07, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:PokemonMini.JPG

potential copyvio, a derivative work --Cat out 23:17, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep "…simply because photographs are in this colloquial sense 'derived' from their subject matter, it does not necessarily follow that they are derivative works under copyright law. . . .[U]tilitarian object[s (such as the Skyy vodka bottle) are] not protected by copyright." (Ets-Hokin v. Skyy Spirits, Inc., 225 F.3d 1068 (9th Cir. 2000)) —LX (talk, contribs) 04:50, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep. There is no violation. Thats a photo of a product similar to thousands of photos. --TM 14:27, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep - I don't see a copyvio here. --32X 22:03, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the {{delete}} because 16 days are enough and nothing happened. --32X 00:25, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept. I know I have initiated and closed the debate but since no one complained I think it is safe to close it after 16 days. --Cat out 00:55, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:PokemonMini.JPG

Derivative of copyrighted Pokemon image and logo -N 23:39, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Should we also delete images in Category:Nintendo DS because the Nintendo DS logo is copyrighted and trademarked? --Damian Yerrick (☎) 23:45, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Who knows? Maybe we should delete screenshots of Windows apps just because they incidentally include a box which was drawn with an API call. -N 23:50, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Exactly. We need precedents for what Commons considers a copyvio and what is merely de minimis copying. I know some people are going through other people's images to find opportunities to set such precedents. Does the previous keeping of this image form part of a precedent? --Damian Yerrick (☎) 14:46, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

speedy keep Clearly a shot of a thing that happens to have a company logo on it. --Simonxag 18:27, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Derivative of copyrighted Pokemon image – Oh noez, 32x42 pixels of the 800x500 pixels resemble a yellowish something. It should be possible to blank out the label of the game cartridge if necessary. Besides that, the logos aren't the main part of the photo, they are only decoration. From my point of view there's no need to delete the photo, so keep it. --32X 00:40, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Kept. The inclusion of the copyrighted element is incidental and takes up 0.3% of the image as a whole. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:02, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Edmund Dulac - Snow Queen.jpg

Reasons for deletion request: The painter Dulac died in 1953. I cannot understand, why this picture should be pd. The same holds for the pictures in [4] Philipendula 01:18, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Delete : but perharps someone could drop a message on en: page because it's a big part of the article. I remove link on fr: page. Oxam Hartog 22:04, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

• Ugh, these are used a lot. Project Gutenberg thinks these are public domain, at least in the US, and they are likely right — but, they may be copyrighted in many other places. Dulac was a Frenchman living and working in London... according to w:Edumund Dulac, he sold the rights to his illustrations to the London printing house though. In this case, the book was published in London in 1911, and may have been simultaneously published elsewhere. A similar image came up before and was kept. It would seem normally that the copyright would be owned by the British publishing company until 2024, but as it may be considered part of a "collective" work, and it may have been published in multiple places... I'm not sure which set of laws would apply. Carl Lindberg 05:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
•  Delete all of the Dulac illustrations. 70years p.m.a. applies. These illustrations are at best PD-US only. As non-U.S. works, they cannot be used under a PD-US claim here on the commons. (But they could be used under such a claim at the en WP.) Lupo 15:40, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned and deleted -- Bryan (talk to me) 21:06, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Anchor Bruce-1-.jpg

The original image on en: has been deleted so no source is checkable. The license is not clear and it may be a copyvio. --Bibi Saint-Pol (sprechen) 15:00, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I think the original on en wiki was en:Image:Anchor Bruce.jpg, and was deleted this past July. Can admins still look at the deleted content to see if a valid source was listed there originally? Carl Lindberg 17:08, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

The only comment it ever had was "Stock photo of Bruce anchor." No source given.  Delete Lupo 12:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. The original on en could probably be undeleted and marked as fair use, but we need to  Delete the commons version. Should be easy enough to get a free replacement anyways. Carl Lindberg 16:15, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete as per previous comments. —LX (talk, contribs) 14:53, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 17:19, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Nitropenta.png

it exists a SVG-image of Nitropenta: Image:PETN.svg --Bangin ¤ ρø$τ 17:44, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Comment : Two pics are not exactly sames but the first is not used. I have droped a message on uploader's page on de:. Without reply of him, I propose to delete in 5 days. Oxam Hartog 23:10, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok so then you can delete it. No problem for me. --Chemiker 09:34, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted. Oxam Hartog 20:29, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:YoungEichmann.jpg

same here --84.168.234.223 08:34, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

• ? I don't see any reason to delete this. --Fang Aili ^talk 17:50, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

•  DeleteThere's no evidence that this image is already public domain in Germany (where it was taken), so it can't be used on commons. --88.134.44.28 21:25, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Delete PD is highly suspactable --ALE! ¿…? 23:01, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted -- Bryan (talk to me) 09:12, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Rgb-compose-Alim Khan.jpg

Same as Commons:Deletion requests/Prokudin-Gorskii-19-v2.png --Muellercrtp 21:01, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept per {{PD-Russia}}. -- Bryan (talk to me) 09:13, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:20euros_or.jpg

Also Image:10euros or.jpg, Image:1.5euro arg.jpg, Image:50euros or.jpg.

As far as I remember, EU bills and coins are copyrighted -- EugeneZelenko 16:12, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete As far as I remember they are indeed. -- Bryan (talk to me) 21:23, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

What about Template:Eurocoins? 68.39.174.238 10:12, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

The link cited in the template appears valid based solely on that source, but it is contradicted by another EU source. I'm not sure who's trying to usurp whose authority here and who really has the right to determine the licence. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:04, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

The link cited on the template only applies to general material on the ECB site.  Delete this template and any image that links from it. -- Bryan (talk to me) 15:09, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep There is a trap: copyright of banknotes and of the common faces of euro coins belongs to EU, which indeed allows the reproduction (see [7]) => No problem. But the copyright for national faces of coins follows national rules, so the EU licence does not apply, and if must be discussed case by case. Furthermore, some contries explicitely forbid non authorised reproductions (Ireland, see [8]), so these photographs should be deleted anyway (afaik). —the preceding unsigned comment is by Micheletb (talk • contribs)

 Done - regardless of whether the bills\coins are copyrighted in and of themselves, the photos are probably Template:Eurocoins whose deletion request outcome was delete. Yonatan ^talk 12:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Lithuania Kaunas monument 1.jpg

Duplicate of Image:Lithuania Kaunas monument 2.jpg (renamed) Wojsyl 22:06, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Please tag as {{duplicate}} or {{badname}} next time. Thanks! --ALE! ¿…? 10:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted --ALE! ¿…? 10:21, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] All Images of Camcan

All photos of User:Camcan are suspected copyvios - they were used in the article "Mokitu" in the French Wikipedia, which has been deleted --Frumpy 14:34, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete – smells like copyvio. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:39, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Delete all - copyvio indeed. -- Bryan (talk to me) 13:50, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

All deleted -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:18, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Astrix,_trance_dj,_with_synthesiser.jpg

source page says: "Copyright © 4clubbers.net - All rights reserved." - no verification for releasing the image into the public domain by the uploader -- Frumpy 16:29, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete – bogus licence. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:11, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Th,90.jpg

tag used is cc-by-sa-2.5. Statement says that "may only be used for non-commercial/educational purposes." -- Shyam ^(T/C) 10:53, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete indeed -- Bryan (talk to me) 12:04, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete – Template:Noncommercial. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:33, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete I the uploader agree--Uwe W. 17:53, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comment Let us give the original uploader at en.wp some time to clarify the license. Kjetil_r 02:56, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comment The orgial License in en:wp is clarifyed. Can the License here clarifyed too?--Uwe W. 20:19, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept: [9] -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:23, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Siena.Contrade.Pantera.jpg

This artwork is still copyrighted, having been created in 1977 (reference), freedom of panorama does not exist in Italy. --Jastrow (Λέγετε) 09:54, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

The same reasoning applies to:

• Image:Baptism fountain Aquila Siena.jpg (artwork created in 1963)
• Image:Baptism fountain Selva Siena.jpg (artwork created in 1965)

Both of them are mine. I misread Commons:Freedom of panorama at the time of upload. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 10:11, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete very reluctantly, but it appears you are right. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted -- Bryan (talk to me) 21:32, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Vizcacha.jpg

Picture so short --> nearly as a stamp... --Patricia.fidi 10:17, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Source page appears to be here, which is a slightly larger version. But it is explicitly a by-nc creative commons license there, not free enough for commons and definitely not PD as claimed. The version of the page that existed when this image was uploaded archive.org link has no copyright notice at all. The image seems to be orphaned as well.  Delete. Carl Lindberg 10:18, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

The uploader goes by the same real name and nickname as the original author, and I don't think we have reason to doubt they are one and the same and that he's free to re-license the work. I can't say whether image size or being an orphan is cause for deletion, but I don't see a copyright issue. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:30, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Whoops, I completely missed that -- thanks. Yes, the license is fine. We can't use the larger version on the named site, but this one is OK. Being an orphan is not grounds for deletion, and image size only if it is too small to be usable at all. This one is really small, but it still could be used in some situations.  Keep Carl Lindberg 04:01, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

kept --ALE! ¿…? 07:43, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:AubreyBeardsley.png

the source, en.wikipedia, says: "Aubrey Beardsley. Foto: Frederick Evans (1853-1943), 1895.". so the photographer - the owner of the copyright - is not dead for more than 70 years. therefore: PD(-old) impossible -- Frumpy 16:34, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete nice find. Correct motivation. Siebrand 21:23, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

also: Image:AubreyBeardsley uncompressed.png --Frumpy 12:08, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete both. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:45, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Samulili 10:47, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Kurudschika 1 Tal.png

No Permisson. —the preceding unsigned comment is by AxelHH (talk • contribs) (originally filed incorrectly here and here)

Please don't attach reports to other, unrelated requests. Do follow the instructions at the top of the page and do note the uploader (which I have done). I also believe this should have been tagged with Template:nsd first. —LX (talk, contribs) 16:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted by Bryan: Per deletion request (nld)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:FloddenBattlefield1.jpg

"By permission" is not an acceptable license term. Image was deleted from the English Wikipedia for violating their fair-use guidelines. --Carnildo 05:23, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

No you deleted it unilaterally and out of spite if not out of process. How does having this image endanger Wikipedia? I invoke IAR.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 15:02, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

What is the license on this image? It appears to be "by-permission", and "by-permission" is not acceptable on either the English Wikipedia or Commons. --Carnildo 20:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

The original tag should have been {{PermissionAndFairUse}} but since that's now depreciated it should be {{Fair use in|Article}}--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 12:33, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for confirming that. Since "fair use" images are not permitted on Commons, I've listed the image for speedy deletion. --Carnildo 20:20, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted by User:EPO --ALE! ¿…? 10:09, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Ice-T.jpg

The uploader, Edgar Allan Poe who appears to live in Croatia, reverted a clear copyvio notice claiming he had taken that picture. [10] I don't believe that for a second, especially seeing that the same claim was also made for Image:Meloni1.jpg. Delete as copyvio. Lupo 08:24, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted by Dodo -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Meloni1.jpg

Same as Image:Ice-T.jpg: false claim about PD-self. Delete as copyvio. Lupo 08:28, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted by Dodo -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Richard Belzer (John Munch).jpg

Same as Image:Ice-T.jpg: false claim about PD-self. Delete as copyvio. Lupo 08:27, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted by Dodo -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Christopher Meloni (Elliot Stabler).jpg

Same as Image:Ice-T.jpg: false claim about PD-self. Delete as copyvio. Lupo 08:31, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted by Dodo -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Ulrich Friedrich Wilhelm Joachim (von) Ribbentrop.jpg

Source is USHMM photo #45249. [11] (Publicity calendar from 1939, showing even a photographer's name in the bottom right.) Not PD in Germany. The USHMM says "copyright USHMM", which is an indication that indeed this is copyrighted. Lupo 08:50, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted by Dodo -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Schindler06615.jpg

USHMM says "copyright USHMM", which is an indication that the photo is not in the public domain but copyrighted. Lupo 08:44, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Copyvio. Deleted. --Dodo 06:22, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Goebbels.jpg

Source is USHMM photo #45300. [12] (Publicity calendar from 1939, showing even a photographer's name in the bottom right.) Not PD in Germany. The USHMM says "copyright USHMM", which is an indication that indeed this is copyrighted. Lupo 08:48, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted by Dodo -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Rudolf Hess.jpg

Source is USHMM photo #45250. [13] (Publicity calendar from 1939, showing even a photographer's name in the bottom right.) Not PD in Germany. The USHMM says "copyright USHMM", which is an indication that indeed this is copyrighted. Lupo 08:53, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted by Dodo -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:SJHenkel.jpg

badfilename --Edward.Hopper 11:21, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• Ms Henkels Name is Susanna Yoko Henkel, so the "J" is missleading

deleted by User:Panther --ALE! ¿…? 10:10, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:SJHenkel2.jpg

badfilename --Edward.Hopper 11:20, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• Ms Henkels Name is Susanna Yoko Henkel, so the "J" is missleading

deleted by User:Panther --ALE! ¿…? 10:10, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:B1e769406f31ec195a4f2795b39c377a-1-.gif

Looks like the film poster or the book cover. no chance for a release into a free license. -- Frumpy 12:47, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted by User:Gizmo II --ALE! ¿…? 10:11, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:SigurRos Jónsi in Action Oct 25 2006 .jpg

(uploaded for an error) Alfreddo 21:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted by User:Nilfanion --ALE! ¿…? 10:12, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Tamora images

The release given in the email posted on this page does not appear to support the claim that this image is released under an attribution-only license; rather, it appears to be a specific grant of permission for Wikipedia. I'm nominating it here instead of for speedy because it seems possible that this was not the intent of the email, or that the copyright holder will be willing to release the image under a free license if asked. Robth 21:58, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Also:

• Image:Tambora_-_RadarImage.jpg
• Image:Tambora_artifact_1.jpg
• Image:Tambora_artifact_2.jpg
• Image:Tambora_artifact_3.jpg
• Image:Tambora_artifact_4.jpg
• Image:Tambora_excavation_1.JPG
• Image:Tambora_excavation_2.JPG
• Image:Tambora_excavation_-_first_clues.JPG

All licensed under same email. Robth 22:09, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Comments: I have asked permission to the webmaster to use the images to illustrate the Wikipedia page. Does it mean that it is not appropriate to upload in Commons? Here the email:

Hi Thomas,

You may feel free to use the photos available via the University of Rhode
Island's Tambora web page (www.uri.edu/news/tambora) to illustrate the
Tambora pages of Wikipedia.  Please simply credit the University for the
photos.  Thanks.

Todd McLeish 
URI News Bureau
401-874-7892

If it is not, then I will upload only at Wikipedia. Indon 14:02, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Update, please don't delete them first
I asked the copyright holder to re-license the images with GFDL license by email. Could we wait for a while before mass-deleting all those images until he has answered, please? Indon 22:49, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

All deleted -- Bryan (talk to me) 10:52, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Romania 1930.svg

• is redundant with respect to Image:Romania 1930, Administrative Map.svg
• has bad quality with respect to Image:Romania 1930, Administrative Map.svg (has annoying white space around the content)
• was a step in production process of earlier mentioned image
• it has no meaning (it has no historical point or no geographical point)

Also please note that since the subject for deletition image is included in Atlas of Romania and Atlas of Moldova pages, maybe a redirect tag is better ideea (after delete it)? -- Cornel Ilie – my talk 03:17, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:58, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Flag of FIAV.svg

It is not in public domain: it is a logotype of a private organization foundend in 1967. --Tonyjeff 02:53, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comment Please look at the copyright page of the website. And you should insert the message to Zscout370 or Himasaram. Best regards --Patricia.fidi 13:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

The link is of a flag dealer, not of FIAV itself. Cannot be considered the copyright of the flag properly. And even so, the copyright of the link you show is restricted, not in public domain. I have already sent messages to the uploaders. Cheers. --Tonyjeff 20:29, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• I don't see your message to zscout370. So I just come to add it on his discussion page: maybe he will give us the licence.
• An administrator have copy/past the code you have forgotten on the log page. If you forget it: requests for deletion are not listed and we can't have a discussion.
• I've ask the designer (Graham Bartram) of this flag to send me the licence. It is the first thing to do: get a contact with the designer when he has an email and then copy/past the licence. Best regards. --Patricia.fidi 01:05, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete : I don't know very well, possibility of copy about flags or arms but at first hand, this flag is under copyright by Graham Bartram (Flag Drawings © Graham Bartram, portions) see this page or also this one

 Comment : sorry for my mistake about author, but for me, we should have here a mail of Klaes Sierksma with confirmation about free license including derivative and commercial usage. Oxam Hartog 12:22, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I do not even know Klaes has an email address, let alone, if he is alive. The flag is 40 years old and many of the people who have founded FIAV are either old aged or have passed on. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 20:29, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep

1. The copyright about the images done by Mr. Bartram himself on his website, not on anything that he has ever made.
2. Second, the copyright I had for the flag in the first place was a CC license, which was copied by the uploader, who has always uploaded my work from en.wikipedia to here.
3. Third, FIAV knows about the existance of the image and is fine with it. I know this because the Secretary General of FIAV, Charles Spain, commented to me privately about the image I have made. I wish to quote the email:

"If FIAV has ever claimed the FIAV flag as a "mark" for intellectual-property purposes, I'm not aware of it. I wouldn't think FIAV has any copyright interest in your rendering of the flag. I'm not an IP lawyer, although I am a lawyer, but my layman's guess is that you are the author of the work as far as your drawing of the FIAV flag. In any event, I haven't heard that anyone is the slightest bit upset, and when someone in this group is, there never seems to be any inhibition about self-expression. Speaking personally, I think it looks great."

• One more thing, Mr. Bartram didn't create the FIAV flag, but Klaes Sierksma did, according to [14]. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:02, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep per ZScout. —Nightstallion (?) 09:40, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep per ZScout --Patricia.fidi 18:03, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for my insistance but according Zscout370 this flag is 40 years old, probably the same thing about basis drawing. For me, rigths of creator run 70 years after death of this one. Lawfully, this drawing can't be to copy. Oxam Hartog 19:13, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I do not know where the creator lived, but if the organization that is using the flag says "Go ahead, use it," I believe that should be fine. I can have Mr. Spain send an email to OTRS and they can review it. There is a FIAV meeting in Germany this year, so I will get someone's attention at the meeting. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 03:18, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep per ZScout Valentinian ^(talk) 13:40, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept / A.J. 10:14, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Template:WikiPcatNo

Reasons for deletion request: A template for marking categories which has no corresponding category at English Wikipedia is not needed. If we used such templates for all Wikipedia languages, the category pages here would be a real mess. If there is no corresponding category, you just have to not put a interwiki link in that category. /82.212.68.183 22:39, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I think Template:WikiPcatNo1 should also be included in this deletion nomination. /82.212.68.183 13:50, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete template madness.. --GeorgHH 20:32, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
• question - What will happen to pages that use these templates?Futurebird 23:43, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

  The template will be removed from the category pages that inlcudes it. And the categories will be kept. /82.212.68.183 19:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted, --Polarlys 12:32, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Goring.jpg

Surely not a work of the United States Federal Government. According to the source, the USHMM, it's from a 1939 calendar of Nazi officials. Not in the PD, because the author is very likely not dead for more than 70 years. --88.134.44.28 00:55, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Delete. Another one of Edgar Allan Poe's mistakes. There are many more, just see Third Reich gallery of photos. Lupo 16:22, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted by Dodo -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:05, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Wappen-Breuningsweiler.jpg

(new transparent version png) Enslin 11:19, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted by User:Ignis --ALE! ¿…? 10:12, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Basilio jose dias

no media, misplaced user page? Rmhermen 16:36, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted, contents moved to User:Basiliojosedias. --GeorgHH 20:53, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:James Brown Photoshop Collage.jpg

This is a collage but the original photo of JB is copyrighted. Username9 13:00, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete Derivative work -- Bryan (talk to me) 14:26, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 19:27, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Cueva Charles Brewer

appears to have nothing to do with the mission of Commons, no media on the page. Related to Image:Chimanta 20esp.pdf uploaded by same user (Is that one ok, either? source?, license?) Rmhermen 16:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted by User:Odder --ALE! ¿…? 22:00, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Zuneetlogo.jpg

copyright violation Rmhermen 23:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete, speedy if possible. Catalarem has uploaded this same image several times, under different names, despite repeated warnings. The logo is obviously copyrighted,[15] and I'm certain that the device image was taken from the official Microsoft press kit,[16] and just edited to remove what was displayed on screen. Dancter 02:15, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Speedy, logo and not PD-self -- Bryan (talk to me) 12:27, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. / Fred Chess 23:41, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] OTRS Ticket: 2007010510008334

Image of works from some Museums in Florence to be deleted:--Cruccone 14:08, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

• Image:Cappelle Medicee, reliquiario 1.JPG
• Image:Cappelle Medicee, reliquiario 6.JPG
• Image:Cappelle Medicee, reliquiario 7.JPG
• Image:Cappelle Medicee, altare.JPG
• Image:Cappelle Medicee, mitra, primo quarto del sec. XVI.JPG
• Image:Anna Maria Luisa de' medici, cappelle.JPG
• Image:Cappelle Medicee, reliquiario 2.JPG
• Image:Cappelle Medicee, reliquiario 3.JPG
• Image:Cappelle Medicee, reliquiario 4.JPG
• Image:Cappelle Medicee, reliquiario 5.JPG
• Image:Cappelle Medicee, reliquiario 8.JPG
• Image:Cappelle Medicee, reliquiario san zanobi 1.JPG
• Image:Cappelle Medicee, reliquiario san zanobi 2.JPG

And why exactly should these images be deleted? Is the uploader not the author? --88.134.44.28 03:12, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

The motivation is the OTRS ticket, i.e. we have been requested to delete all the images from the national museums of Florence. This is only the beginning. --Cruccone 23:33, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

By whom? By the museums? If so, this deletion request is misplaced. Contact Brad Patrick about it. I don't think the museums have any copyright on these old reliquia etc. What reason for deleting these images is given in the OTRS ticket? If the museums are trying to enforce their house rules, which probably do not allow photography: AFAIK our usual position is that we don't honor their house rules. If someone breaks their house rules and does take photos, that's his or her risk to take. WP as a tertiary publisher of such images cannot be held liable for a break of some house rules committed by a third party, i.e. the photographer. Thus, I would delete these images only if the Foundation's legal counsel (that's Brad) concurs that the images should be removed. Lupo 09:14, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I am the uploader of those files, I will prefer them to be deleted if the uploading was not legal. I would like to be informed about how the question goes on. I really apologize, I'm very sad for causing this. Thanks for understanding. --Sailko 10:51, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

1st sorry for my bad english. I'm not a lawyer, but the problem seem to be a recent (2004) italian law [17] that give to "Ministero dei Beni culturali" the decision about the right to reproduce all the artistic, archeologic, architectural, etc. place&thing in Italy, whatever is their age. If the reproduction (photo, video, digital photo) are for pesonal use (and relesing it with a "free" license obviously isn't personal use) and the Ministero (or a local section) don't sell the exclusive right of reproduction to some company, a person can take photo, etc. without asking for permission. In all other case (ie photo for commercial use) a permission must be given preventively, ad the "ministero dei Beni culturali" or local section or the company that buy the right of reproduction, and these organization decide every time if give or refus this permission, and how much this permission cost (from 0 to infinite). If the permission is given, per person must give to the Ministero a "printing" of the image. --Yoggysot 23:59, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

This is a bad place to discuss this problem. If you are correct, then the images are obvious copyright violations and can be speedy deleted. That's no problem. But the important question is whether you are correct. I would like opinions from people who know something about Italian copyright law, such as it:Utente:Senpai.

However, to be on the safe side, I'll delete the images first of all. Better safe than sorry.

Fred Chess 23:53, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

done for the moment --ALE! ¿…? 12:25, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Human skull.svg

the image is repeated. has wrong copyright status and authorship. the user Alvesgaspar trying to help me upload it. but it is no longer necesary. the original image is at --LadyofHats 21:17, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

• This is a slightly improved version of LadyofHats original image (Image:Human skull front complete.svg), made with the purpose of improving its chances of being promoted to featured picture. The copyright status and authorship has been corrected and are now identical to the original one. I don't see any valid reason for deletion since this not a repetition of the original. Alvesgaspar 21:50, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept -- Bryan (talk to me) 09:17, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Helium-II-creep.png

Superseded by SVG, all occurrences replaced across wikipedias. – Tintazul ^talk 17:50, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted --ALE! ¿…? 16:13, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Dalí.Rinoceronte.JPG

Derivative work of a copyrighted sculpture. Fair-use claim is not valid on Commons, though the image could be uploaded locally to Wikipedias that allow fair-use. —Angr 18:25, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Spain has freedom of panorama, and this should qualify. The fair use claim is actually incorrect -- this is not a derivative work. Spanish law is different than US law in this detail.  Keep and remove fair-use tag. Carl Lindberg 09:29, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

kept --ALE! ¿…? 08:34, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Bos taurus indicus.jpg

Same picture as Image:Zebu.jpg --Leyo 18:54, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Then please tag it with {{duplicate}} -- Bryan (talk to me) 11:24, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

the first one kept, the second one tagged with {{duplicate}} --ALE! ¿…? 16:16, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Tycho1545.JPG

More work from Edgar Allan Poe. In this case, a misleading name. Tyge (Tycho) Ottesen Brahe was born in 1546. The image name makes the user believe that the depiction dates from 1545. --Valentinian ^(talk) 16:32, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

The correct date is probably c. 1600, btw. Valentinian ^(talk) 17:43, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

kept, the wrong name is no reason for deletion. Please add the relevant date to the description. --ALE! ¿…? 09:49, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Jesch_Trikoloren.jpg

No PD-self, the author can't be death for 70 years -- Borheinsieg 11:37, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted --ALE! ¿…? 13:57, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:CroppedCarrieUnderwoodAtTheWorldArena.jpg

The picture was taken at a concert where broadcasting rights and publicity rights apply. There is a discussion here that pertains to the image. --ShadowHalo 10:28, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

• comment: This picture was caught up in a dispute over Wikipedia:Fair use criteria. The releveant bits of the discussion where publishing and broadcasting rights (or rather as I understoood it) is here. It would be useful to get some consensus over the status of pictures taken in "un-free" performances (performances/concerts in which admission $$$ is charged) and what sort of rights issues exist in such concerts/performances. --Eqdoktor 12:15, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

As far as I know we do not care about publicity rights on Commons. About broadcasting rights I don't know. Can you point out which broadcasting rights apply here? -- Bryan (talk to me) 11:59, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

• Keep this image was submitted for deletion consideration under the premise that the person making this image was under a contractual obligation not to (i.e. an admission ticket prohibiting commercial photography). While some venues prohibit such photography, others do not, and such prohibitions may vary by artist and by performance as well. In this case, there is no evidence presented one way or the other that any such restrictions applied. In short, this IfD has been submitted on speculation, and we have no ready means to prove it one way or the other. If we remove this image based upon speculation rather than fact, then we should remove any image that doesn't come with a notarized release demonstrating that the uploader indeed held the appropriate copyrights. Obviously, we don't do that here. We do not remove images based upon mere speculation. Rklawton 04:31, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Rlawton is correct. Keep. --MichaelMaggs 11:54, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Topless on south african beach.jpg

following the permission the author of this shoot wasn't allowed to make it a release under cc-by-sa-20 if i'm not wrong ("I don't have any problem with you using it there and have changed the licence. I have no model release for this shot though so while that may not be a problem for using it on wikipedia, it may present a problem for anyone trying to use it commercially in some other way.") --JD {æ} 13:22, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

The copyrights are correct, although this might be a case where we have to take publicity rights into account. -- Bryan (talk to me) 14:21, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, I'm unfamiliar with publicity rights, but the deletion makes sense. --Iamunknown 04:33, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm inclined to close this as a Keep. Publicity rights don't seem relevant as the photo was taken in a public place and the woman isn't identifiable. Comments? --MichaelMaggs 11:58, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

The discussion at Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Range-Murata-03.jpg seems relevant. Since no deletion request from the subject has been alleged, nor is likely to be verifiable, I don't think publicity rights apply. Image:Gene1.jpg is an example of an image where publicity rights are alleged. The image has been retained. Wsiegmund 20:33, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Kept. Wsiegmund 04:28, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Bergischer Loewe transparen.png

the original comes from http://www.bgv-online.de/graphik/loewe_rot.GIF Herrick 09:30, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I just helped one user Theophilus Berger on Images to be improved to make this Image:Bergischer Löwe Ursprung.png transparent. --Kobako 13:35, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

There is no copyright violation. The design is 700 years old. The lion is from the coats of arms of the former Duchy of Berg. About its history see de:Bergischer Löwe. It is still part of many coats of arms in the region, e.g. Image:Radevormwald Wappen.png, Image:Wappen-oberberg-k.png, Image:Kreiswappen des Kreises Mettmann.png. Monochrome: Kreis Mettmann: History

 Keep -- Simplicius 13:30, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

delete because the correct design would shown a blue crown. As a difference you see by the plump silouette of the lion Bergischer Loewe transparen.png that this is a copy of the design used by the Bergischer Geschichtsverein. --Herrick 13:50, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep the design is 700 years old, no copyright violation, --Kobako 07:47, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep the design is 700 years old, no copyright violation, 84.186.228.174 10:57, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept / A.J. 15:25, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Territorio libero di Trieste carta.png

This image is translation of the Slovenian version, which itself is translation of an Italian version that was deleted in 2005 as 'unverified'. Eleassar ^(t/p) 16:02, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

OPPOSE. Deleted image was scanned from unknown source, but new one is drawn! --Andrejj 16:55, 5 January 2007 (UTC)--Andrejj 16:55, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Keep Aotearoa 05:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept / A.J. 15:27, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Airbus A340-200 Qatar Airways MUC.jpg

Reasons for deletion request: it have a copyright, and the uploader cannot be the autor, because it has diferent name in comparison with File:Airbus A340-500 Qatar Airways MUC.jpg, a photo uploaded by the same person. --ROBERTO DAN 09:37, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

quote from original author: "wenn Sie meinen Namen bei Wikipedia mit hochladen, dürfen Sie das Bild gerne verwenden!" =>CC-BY-SA-2.5

-> If the image uploaded to Wikipedia carries my nam then you are allowed to used this image under cc-by-sa-2.5.

--Denniss 11:26, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I will send the e-mails of the author to permissions@wikipedia.org. --My name 13:00, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted: 3 months have passed without any response. Furthermore I would like to emphasize that I find it very strange that an attribution, Wikipedia only permission is translated into a CC license. -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:13, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Airbus A340-500 Qatar Airways MUC.jpg

Reasons for deletion request: it have a copyright, and the uploader cannot be the autor, because it has diferent name in comparison with File:Airbus A340-200 Qatar Airways MUC.jpg, a photo uploaded by the same person. --ROBERTO DAN 09:41, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

quote from original author: "Ich, Max Teuber hab's mir mal angeschaut und solange mein Name dabei steht, geht das so okay [, das Bild in Commons hochzuladen]. Consequently: cc-by-sa-2.5"

-> I, Max Teuber, looked at the file and as long it carries carries my name then you are allowed to used this image under cc-by-sa-2.5.

--Denniss 11:25, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I will send the e-mails of the author to permissions@wikipedia.org. --My name 13:00, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted: 3 months have passed without any response. Furthermore I would like to emphasize that I find it very strange that an attribution, Wikipedia only permission is translated into a CC license. -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:14, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Eddie Robson

Page contains no media, appear to be a biographical article Rmhermen 06:00, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

I have tagged it speedy, as it is a copy of es:Eddie Robson. -- Bryan (talk to me) 11:05, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted by EugeneZelenko -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:19, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Verlon Collage.jpg

(image is a duplicate) --Patalena 22:51, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Done. Proper filename is Image:VerlonCollage.jpg
Julo 23:38, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:USS Macon secundary control station.jpg

The name of the image is misspelled: should be "secondary", not "secundary." This file may be replaced by Image:USS Macon secondary control station.jpg, and I have already done this everywhere it is used. Dar-Ape 02:57, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Please tag the original with {{duplicate}} -- Bryan (talk to me) 11:06, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I have done so. Dar-Ape 04:58, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted by User:Pfctdayelise --ALE! ¿…? 10:04, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:800px-Markale2.JPG

"can be freely used without significant alterations" is unfortunately not good enough. Modification must be allowed. 88.134.44.28 03:55, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete unfree, delete -- Bryan (talk to me) 11:06, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 19:29, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:A380.jpg

"free for media use" is not free enough. 88.134.44.28 04:07, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete unfree, delete -- Bryan (talk to me) 11:06, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 19:33, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Exhibitionground2006.jpg

"free for media use" is not free enough. 88.134.44.28 04:09, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete unfree, delete -- Bryan (talk to me) 11:06, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 19:39, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Les fils de caïn-Paul Landowski-front-leftt-20050628.jpg

Statue by Paul Landowski (d. 1961) in Paris. France has no freedom of panorama. Same request for two other views of the same work:

• Image:Les fils de caïn-Paul Landowski-front-right-20050628.jpg
• Image:Les fils de caïn-Paul Landowski-back-20050628.jpg

Jastrow (Λέγετε) 17:44, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

From same author in France :

• Image:Montreuilhaig.jpg
• Image:Montreuilhaigdetail.jpg‎

Mathieu 21:31, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Delete : All have to be deleted. No publishable freely before 2042 without agreement of entitled's creator.
  Without opposed opinion before 5 days, I will delete these pics. Oxam Hartog 23:29, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

 Done : Statues of Paul Landowski in France, unfree to publication before 2032. Oxam Hartog 20:46, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Paris-montaigne-statue.jpg

Statue by Paul Landowski (d. 1961) in Paris. France has no freedom of panorama. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 17:50, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete : No publishable freely before 2042 without agreement of entitled's creator.
Without opposed opinion before 5 days, I will delete this pics. Oxam Hartog 23:49, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

 Done : Statues of Paul Landowski in France, unfree to publication before 2042. Oxam Hartog 20:55, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Image-Pont de la tournelle-Sainte Geneviève-closeup-front-20050628.jpg

Statue by Paul Landowski (d. 1961) in Paris. France has no freedom of panorama. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 17:56, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete : No publishable freely before 2042 without agreement of entitled's creator.
Without opposed opinion before 5 days, I will delete this pic. Oxam Hartog 23:50, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

 Done : Statues of Paul Landowski in France, unfree to publication before 2042. Oxam Hartog 20:57, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Le passe-muraille.jpg

Statue by en:Jean Marais (d. 1998), hence still copyrighted. France has no freedom of panorama. Same problem with Image:Passe-muraille.jpg. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 18:33, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete : No publishable freely before 2069 without agreement of entitled's creator.
Without opposed opinion before 5 days, I will delete these pics. Oxam Hartog 23:52, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

 Done / Statues by Jean Marais in France, unfree to publication before 2069. Oxam Hartog 22:32, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Telephon-Billet.gif

it's certainly not a stamp -- Frumpy 13:00, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

My english is not so good, the answer in German: Bei dem "Telepon-Billet" handelt es sich zwar nicht um eine richtige Briefmarke, aber es wird eine Briefmarke auf der linken Seite abgebildet. Außerdem wurde das Billet ebenfalls von der damaligen Post ausgegeben. Somit gilt für das Billet das gleiche Recht wie für die damaligen Briefmarken. Des weiteren ist es eh über 100 Jahre (PD-Old). Gruß --kandschwar 13:20, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

kept (annonymous + 100 years) --ALE! ¿…? 23:10, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Bahndienstfernschreiben.jpg

abstract point of view taking this license for this "photo" -- Frumpy 12:42, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

• KEEP No Schöpfungshöhe AND Amtliches Werk' (official work according § 5 I UrhG) --Historiograf 00:31, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep as per Historiograf. Fits the official decree criteria. --Doco 01:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 16:41, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Mark_Harman_Speaking.jpg

Probably a copyvio, uploaded from this page [18] with crédit photo Mike Minehan -- Oxam Hartog 15:58, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete : Site don't claim copyright, but whithout clear information on free licence, we cannot consider this pic free. Oxam Hartog 16:02, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 20:06, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Southern_Cameroon.png

This image is from the Flags of the World website which was uploaded after May 19, 2005 -- Shyam ^(T/C) 15:52, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

delete. Non-commercial only. --MichaelMaggs 12:09, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:WglaunchMTL small.jpg

No evidence for governmental authorship visible --Flominator 13:04, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Delete §5 Urhg does not apply for photographic works. --Matt314 16:21, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted / A.J. 10:17, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Ww1-elephant.jpg

Author is unknown, and it can not be guarantied, that the image ist PD-old. The License of State Library of Victoria is noncommercial. --Ixitixel 09:51, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Closed: License tag changed / A.J. 10:26, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] All Images of Luanawilder

All photos of User:Luanawilder are suspected copyvios --Frumpy 20:48, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

all pics deleted (copyvio about rights of Jumanji film) Oxam Hartog 00:13, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Ducks.JPG

I am a beginner and forgot to check if the name I gave already existed. In the english wikipedia there is another picture with this name. So I have re-uploaded it as Ducks in Munich.JPG Hoverfish 20:00, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Please use {{bad name}} for such requests. Kjetil_r 02:43, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Kairo metro map.png

Image includes name of creator 89.241.44.96 20:48, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Keep speedy keep: this is certainly no reason for a deletion --Frumpy 20:51, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
•  Keep Useless request, IMO. No reason for deletion whatsoever. Siebrand 22:21, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
•  Keep obviously --Astrokey44 11:47, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept. Watermarking is discouraged, but not against policy. As the map is freely licensed, you may remove the watermark. Kjetil_r 02:46, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:UBahnLinienbandMuenchen2006.png

image includes e-mail address of creator in top-left corner --89.241.44.96 20:51, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

This is not a reason for deletion. The image was created by the uploader, and was licensed originally as {{GFDL}}, which was later changed to {{CC-BY-SA-2.5}} (I presume, by the uploader). Both licenses require attribution, so the inclusion of the author and his e-mail are fine from a licensing point-of-view. WP practice is to attribute on the image description pages, though, and furthermore, it's questionable whether including an e-mail address in an attribution is a wise thing to do... Both licenses also allow others to modify the image as they see fit. So, if that e-mail address bothers you, just edit the image and remove the e-mail address. Lupo 09:00, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Keep Not a reason for deletion. And why not just remove it? // Liftarn

Kept. Watermarking is discouraged, but not against policy. As the map is freely licensed, you may remove the watermark. Kjetil_r 02:46, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Joshua_A_Norton2.JPG

fatal source and no clear status of copyright -- Frumpy 20:21, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Heya Frumpy, I ask you to wait 5 days till I get a response from Gwazz the autor of the artwork. Thanks -- Walter Humala Walter Humala EmperorofWestWikipediaGodsave him! wanna Talk?wanna Talk? 21:50, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Here it is: :::It's a Photoshopping by me of two public domain images. Hope that clears things up. (moncubus_at_gmail.com)

As he said, I hope that clears things up. -- Walter Humala Walter Humala EmperorofWestWikipediaGodsave him! wanna Talk?wanna Talk? 00:00, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This file has been deleted by User:Thuresson. If you can provide the source PD-images feel free to reupload this file. -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:05, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:BMegret2002.jpg

"This image has been released by political organization to promote its work or product in the media, such as advertising material or a promotional photo in a press kit."

Promotional images are not completely free images. 88.134.44.28 02:23, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 18:39, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Alfred Gusenbauer.jpg

Fake version of Image:Gusenbauer.jpg. --Ephraim33 08:50, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted. Oxam Hartog 23:56, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:John_g_stephenson.jpg

source says: "Rights status not evaluated [19]" -- Frumpy 20:18, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep It is a portrait photo from when he headed the Library of Congress (1861-1864). In almost all likelihood it is PD-old, if not, it is PD-USGov. I admit I am not a fan of PD-LOC as currently worded... I think the images should at least be marked as "No known restrictions" before we assume PD status. But there is no reason we can't sometimes draw our own conclusions, such as in this case. Carl Lindberg 04:05, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep acc M. Lindberg. Schaengel89 15:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep, we can be pretty sure it is PD-old. Kjetil_r 02:52, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 18:42, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Girl-on-beach.jpg

the girl did not agree photographing her and publishing the image in the internet -- Frumpy 20:33, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

• How do you know that (and why didn't you ask before)? By the way, the person cannot be identified in the photo. The deletion request is just ridiculous. Alvesgaspar 20:38, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
•  Keep - unidentifiable -- Bryan (talk to me) 18:56, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
•  Keep unidentifiable. Bad style Frumpy! --Ikiwaner 23:31, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

:see Frumpys talk page --Ikiwaner 23:34, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Keep, she is unidentifiable. Kjetil_r 02:49, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 23:31, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Torre Guinigi.jpg

対象画像は、この画像とおなじものと見た。このサイト下部には「©1994-2007 VirtualTourist.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved.」と書いてあり、VirtualTourist.comが「Copyrighted free use」というライセンスでこの画像を提供するとは思えない。著作権を侵害していないだろうか。--Junichi 10:34, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

• （取り下げ）「即時削除」でも、対処できるようなので、取り下げます。--Junichi 02:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
• （explanation）"取り下げ" is withdraw in Japanese.--Kazutoko 07:59, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted by User:Matt314 --ALE! ¿…? 22:48, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Wzór_gęstość_ładunku.jpg

we've got LATEX for mathmatics - producing an image is not necessary -- Frumpy 20:24, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted because not used, can be done with TEX --Matt314 16:24, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Anemelectrorecul.jpg

Image will be public domain in 2015. Meanwhile it is only « fair use » which is contrary to Commons policy and prohibited on fr.wikipedia as well. This image is far from being forgotten by the publisher which still makes profit from books containing this image. He is likely to disagree with publication in Wikipedia. Plenty of children possess albums with this image and will be able to scan it when they are grown up and the image is finally in public domain. By the way the uploader is blocked forever on fr.wikipedia for various serious reasons so it is impossible to contact him/her to get more details about any special permission he might have obtained. — Jérôme Borme 16:23, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Quotation

This is not a stand-alone picture, but an excerpt from "L'idée fixe du savant Cosinus" by Christophe (ISBN 2-200-37032-6). First published in 1899 by "Librairie Armand Colin", author died in 1945, the rights for the book (which is a comics strips, not plain text) seem to belong to Hachette Livre. It does not fall into the category "Scans or reproductive photographs of copyrighted artwork, especially book covers, album/CD covers, etc", since the reproduction is not of the whole strip, but of a portion of it. It does fall under Berne convention, Art. 10-a:

"It shall be permissible to make quotations from a work which has already been lawfully made available to the public, provided that their making is compatible with fair practice, and their extent does not exceed that justified by the purpose, including quotations from newspaper articles and periodicals in the form of press summaries."

There is no reason to use any "fair use" exception, since quotations are alowed by the Berne convention -which applies internationally-, and do not depend on US-specific laws. Examine the case:

• A quotation is "free material", meaning that it can be used and re-used without having to pay or ask for any permission.
• Acknowledgement of author is required (accepted on commons).
• Publication of derivative work under the same license is required (accepted on commons).
• Not limited to a use by Wikipedia only.
• Not limited to Noncommercial/Educational use only.
• No invocation of "fair use" conditions.
• Notification of the creator is not required.

There is a restriction to the use of a quotation (it must be inserted as a quotation in a wider work, not be used as a stand-alone), but then, the same applies to all pictures with only a GFDL licence, which cannot be used outside a "GNU free documentation licence", i.e. inserted inside a free document.

I suggest to create & use some kind of GFDL licence with a "Invariant Section" (See GFDL art. 1) stating ♦ The copyright information attached to the source, ♦ A disclaimer, that the quotation is being used under the quotation mechanism of the Berne convention, ♦ A warning, that for any other use, the legality must be checked against the copyright information.

This picture is a good "case study" for that. Micheletb 07:49, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

• See GFDL
• See Berne convention.
• See Commons:Project scope and Commons:Licensing for references.

 Delete Unsourced, likely fair use. -- Bryan (talk to me) 15:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

1. Quotation needs context to be embedded into. The nature of Commons is an image repository, so there is no embedding context. I might be lawful to use a picture in a Wikipedia article but images on Commons have to be free and reusable without the context of a Wikipedia article.
2. I don't know if I understand your arguing about the invariant section. The "invariant section" of the GFDL does only apply for "Secondary Sections" (This is an "appendix or a front-matter section of the Document that deals exclusively with the relationship of the publishers or authors of the Document to the Document's overall subject (or to related matters) and contains nothing that could fall directly within that overall subject. [20]) So images cannot be a invariant section.

Thus  Delete--Matt314 17:14, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Delete I'll just quote myself: "[21]" Samulili 21:24, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
•  Delete per Samulili and myself. [22] Lupo 22:33, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
•  Delete Sadly enough (I discovered how long fr:Georges Colomb lived a few minutes ago - I just had prepared another scan from the same book, sadly enough I'll have to wait until 2015 to load it...) Touriste 22:30, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 16:40, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:N1219410085_30035901_6248.jpg

unclear permission: "Permission is given for every use" and no permission for publishing in the internet given by the woman pictured -- Frumpy 21:04, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted: private preson, no model release, unused / A.J. 10:29, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:SekulaGibbs.jpg

Possible copyvio from [23], permission claimed but no confirmation. Conscious 20:36, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Who makes this claim??? It is wrong. The image was sent to me directly from the Sekula-Gibbs campaign. I believe that the one making the claim needs to prove that it is a copyright violation.--Getaway 01:41, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Also, please review the campaign website. There are no copyright notices on the website and I have provided the name of the campaign worker that gave me permission.--Getaway 01:44, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Please forward the email to Commons:OTRS permissions-commons@wikimedia.org so that this claim can be verified. -- Bryan (talk to me) 21:52, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Author and source MUST be provided, otherwise this file will be deleted. A.J. 15:29, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

deleted (no permission) --ALE! ¿…? 08:54, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Walther Funk.jpg

Image source: [24], USHMM photo #45279. USHMM says "Copyright: USHMM". Original source: calendar from 1939 showing Nazi officials; photographer mentioned in bottom right below the image. Copyrighted in Germany. Delete. Lupo 09:28, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted by Dodo -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:01, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Julius Streicher.jpg

Image source: [25], USHMM photo #45238. USHMM says "Copyright: USHMM". Original source: calendar from 1939 showing Nazi officials; photographer mentioned in bottom right below the image. Copyrighted in Germany. Delete. Lupo 10:02, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted by Dodo -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:01, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Hermann Goering.jpg

USHMM photo #06836. USHMM states "copyright: USHMM", which is an indication that the image is indeed copyrighted. Photographer unknown, but in all likelihood a German; German WWII-era photographs are still copyrighted. Delete. Lupo 10:00, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted by Dodo -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:02, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Lutz Graf Schwerin von Krosigk.jpg

Image source: [26], USHMM photo #45280. USHMM says "Copyright: USHMM". Original source: calendar from 1939 showing Nazi officials; photographer mentioned in bottom right below the image. Copyrighted in Germany. Delete Lupo 09:51, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted by Dodo -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:01, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Arthur Seyss-Inquart.jpg

Image source: [27], USHMM photo #45270. USHMM says "Copyright: USHMM". Original source: calendar from 1939 showing Nazi officials; photographer mentioned in bottom right below the image. Copyrighted in Germany. Delete. Lupo 09:49, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted by Dodo -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:01, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Konstantin von Neurath1.jpg

Image source: [28], USHMM photo #45315. USHMM says "Copyright: USHMM". Original source: calendar from 1939 showing Nazi officials; photographer mentioned in bottom right below the image. Copyrighted in Germany. Delete. Lupo 09:47, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete and reupload in 2010. -- Bryan (talk to me) 11:56, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
  • It's 70 years after the author's death. Did he die in 1939? Lupo 13:39, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Hmmm well according to dutch law, things that were copyrighted by a company expire 70 years after publication. But I don't know about the situation in Germany. -- Bryan (talk to me) 18:52, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
      • Why company? In Germany, copyright is and always was vested in the natural person who created the work, i.e. the real author, not some company. Lupo 07:39, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted by Dodo -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:01, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Law & Order: SVU

All these images are copyright violations. (Listed separately above.) Delete. Lupo 09:42, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Also delete Category:Law & Order actors. Lupo 09:42, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Delete obvious copyvios by serial offender. This is getting old. —LX (talk, contribs) 05:25, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Both already was empty. --Panther 18:32, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Wikishots1111 002a.jpg

(The uploader says it is duplicate and asked for deletion.) 84.20.17.84 16:40, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, please delete this image. It was uploaded under the wrong name. IFCAR 01:58, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. --Panther 18:33, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Dimebag3.jpg

"The copyright holder" surely isn't "Canned Chaos" (www.cannedchaos.com) so it can't give any allowances for any use whatsoever. --JD {æ} 19:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

That looks like a {{cover}} -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:26, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete because even if they were, they don't: "copyright © 1997-2006". —LX (talk, contribs) 16:11, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted by User:Bryan. --Panther 18:35, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Truncated cuboctahedron flat.png

Superseded by SVG, orphaned on all wikis. – Tintazul ^talk 23:32, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Not until the licence on the derivative version is changed to GFDL. Nothing in the original file gives permission to distribute derivative works under CC-by-SA. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:52, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept: not the same & per LX. --Panther 18:38, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Ariel atoms2.jpg

No evidence it's available under a GFDL license; may be appropriate for en.wikipedia.org, but not for commons. Interiot 23:47, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Delete speedy if possible, clear copyvio. -- Bryan (talk to me) 21:59, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
•  Delete bogus licence. Publishing != permitting unrestricted use. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:51, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted -- Bryan (talk to me) 16:03, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Ageha01.jpg

Superseded by SVG, orphaned across the wikis. --– Tintazul ^talk 23:53, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Not until the licence on the derivative version is changed to GFDL. Nothing in the original file gives permission to distribute derivative works under CC-by-SA. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete now that the derivative has been adjusted accordingly. —LX (talk, contribs) 03:59, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted -- Bryan (talk to me) 16:03, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Walter Funk.jpg

No source (image does not exist at sv or nl WPs); German WWII-era photographs are still copyrighted. Also delete the page Walther Funk. Lupo 09:29, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

It did exist on Swedish Wikipedia and was deleted when the Commons version replaced it. According to the deleted image description, the photograph was taken in 1933. Would that still be copyrighted? —LX (talk, contribs) 16:17, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes. In Germany images don't become PD until 70 years after the death of the author. --88.134.44.28 11:32, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted by User:555 --ALE! ¿…? 11:02, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Narnia combined different maps.gif

I made this before derivative works became policy here, now realise it is a derivative work; CS Lewis Narnia stories still in copyright. ----Astrokey44 08:35, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete, I'm afraid I have to agree, but glad to see you're forthcoming about it. —LX (talk, contribs) 16:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Delete as copvio, now agreed by author. --MichaelMaggs 12:17, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:BoNM - PRC.png

author nom Ling.Nut 01:34, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Why do you want it deleted? Also, {{speedy}} is preferable for author requests. -- Bryan (talk to me) 21:54, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

You can not revoke this license --ALE! ¿…? 23:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I made three barnstars for Wikiproject China. They declined; they believe the use of PRC colors/insignia is POV for their politically touchy project. So now all three are kinda in limbo; I'm not sure that they will ever be used for anything. --Ling.Nut 02:08, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Deleted: not usable by any project / A.J. 15:31, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:BoNM - PRC2.png

author nom --Ling.Nut 01:38, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I made three barnstars for Wikiproject China. They declined; they believe the use of PRC colors/insignia is POV for their politically touchy project. So now all three are kinda in limbo; I'm not sure that they will ever be used for anything. --Ling.Nut 02:09, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Deleted: not usable by any project / A.J. 15:32, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:BoNM - PRC3.png

author nom --Ling.Nut 01:39, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I made three barnstars for Wikiproject China. They declined; they believe the use of PRC colors/insignia is POV for their politically touchy project. So now all three are kinda in limbo; I'm not sure that they will ever be used for anything. --Ling.Nut 02:10, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Deleted: not usable by any project / A.J. 15:32, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Disneylandmap2.jpg

Image with a copyright taken from the official booklet : [29], [30] or [31] --Gdgourou 06:31, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted for copyvio Oxam Hartog 23:42, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:MaCaulayLawrence Lib.jpg

The copyright notice on the website doesn't say that all images are free. ("The visitor should be aware that some of the material found on this site might be subject to copyright held by third parties. It is the sole responsibility of the visitor to determine the copyright of the content and to obtain all necessary permissions.") 88.134.44.28 13:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Speedy delete: copyvio -- Bryan (talk to me) 16:04, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted for copyvio Oxam Hartog 23:36, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Sasa rindo01.jpg

Superseded by SVG, orphaned across all wikis. --– Tintazul ^talk 00:41, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Not until the licence on the derivative version is changed to GFDL. Nothing in the original file gives permission to distribute derivative works under CC-by-SA. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:38, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete now that the derivative has been adjusted accordingly. —LX (talk, contribs) 04:00, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. --Panther 18:42, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Map figueres.jpg

Image:Map figueres.jpg - copyrighted map, not self made —the preceding unsigned comment is by 86.92.243.235 (talk • contribs) 01:51, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

(reason for deletion) --86.92.243.235 01:56, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Please put in a reason for deletion... not so much fun having to guess. ;-) In this case, the image appears to be a clear copyvio of this image (linked at the top of this page). The server date for this original image is from 2002, making the claim of self-authorship highly unlikely.  Delete Carl Lindberg 05:42, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete, bogus licence. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:34, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted as copyvio. --Panther 18:44, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:1615a logic analyzer.jpg

Not GFDL. see [32] and [33] --Shizhao 03:48, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted as copyvio. --Panther 18:47, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Eva Gonzalès - Le petit lever.jpg

quality? --Wst ^question 08:03, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete as duplicate. -- Bryan (talk to me) 10:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete, agreed. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:31, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted, superseded. --Panther 18:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Letterit-welcome-de.png

The screenshot is no longer needed, the uploader. FotoHamster 22:20, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. --Panther 18:52, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Throbbing Gristle 1981.jpg

Taken from [34], description there: "photo: Industrial Records Ltd", no indication of free usage. regards, High on a tree 23:36, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete, bogus licence. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:10, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted as copyvio. --Panther 18:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Flag of Manchukuo.svg

copyright violation Cariner 20:41, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Speedy kept: The site does not own copyright to the flag, and the flag has been created by a Commons user. -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:19, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Shenyang from International Space Station.jpg

low quality, no useful information Cariner 20:34, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Speedy keep and revert removal of image description, high quality, unique information. -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:16, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Dalian Bank Tower and older shops 2005.jpg

low quality, no useful information Cariner 20:35, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Keep quality high enough; wouldn't have been a criteria for deletion anyway. -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
•  DeleteUgly picture. Decreasing the quality of Wikipedia. Cariner 22:27, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept. Bad faith nomination. --Cat out 22:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Zhongshan Square, Dalian.jpg

low quality, no useful information Cariner 20:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

• What do you mean, exactly? It's a good picture of a major city square. It's hazed, but I suppose that's a smog problem in Dalian, not a problem with the image quality. The picture is in use in a Wikipedia article, en:Dalian. Sandstein 20:56, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• There are a lot of clear high quality pictures for Dalian. Please let others use better photos. Cariner 21:12, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
•  Keep quality high enough; wouldn't have been a criteria for deletion anyway. -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:11, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
•  DeleteUgly picture. Decreasing the quality of Wikipedia. Cariner 22:27, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept. Bad faith nomination. --Cat out 22:50, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Shenyang.soccer.stadium.jpg

low quality, no useful information Cariner 20:37, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Keep quality high enough; wouldn't have been a criteria for deletion anyway. -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:24, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
•  DeleteUgly picture. Decreasing the quality of Wikipedia. Cariner 22:28, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept. Bad faith nomination. --Cat out 22:49, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Shenyang.sunset.haze.2006.jpg

low quality, no useful information Cariner 20:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Keep quality high enough; wouldn't have been a criteria for deletion anyway. -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:24, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
•  DeleteUgly picture. Decreasing the quality of Wikipedia. Cariner 22:29, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• Ugly is a WP:POV. We are not Wikipedia anyway. This is Wikimedia Commons. -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:31, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept. Bad faith nomination. --Cat out 22:54, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Flag of Kurdistan.svg

• Other version: Image:Flag of Kurdistan.png

No evidence that this flag is PD. Iraqi Kurdistan in a state in Iraqi federal body and not a country so the image isn't default PD. See w:Kurdish flag for additional detail. No evidence is provided on how old the flag really is. --Cat out 01:33, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I think the simple design used in this flag may be ineligible for copyright protection (might lack the "minimum creativity" required). There may, however, be other laws governing the use of the flag. KovacsUr 02:29, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Possible, but as you point out Iraqi law needs clarification. Who owns the copyright the image is a key question unanswered at the point. Is it the Iraqi Federal Government's work or the Iraqi Kurdistan feleral states work? Compare to US federal structure as state flags are not auto PD. I'd rather avoid a "PD-inelligable" approach and have a basis for copyright. Other laws in question may restrict the right to copy globally --Cat out 02:49, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Keep, PD-ineligible. Kjetil_r 02:41, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
•  Keep Aotearoa 05:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• According to us at FOTW, the flag has been around since 1920. If we got from the current copyright of Iraq, stated in 2004, the flag would be in the public domain now. [35] says that after 50 years of publication of works created by unknown authors, the work will become public domain. So 1920+50=1970. The flag has been in the public domain for over 30 years, if I read everything right.  Keep. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 05:56, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

  I'd like to see evidence flag was around back in the 1920's by a reputable source (historic site) the w:Kurdish flag article suggests a different version was used back then. :/ --Cat out 14:43, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Keep, ineligible. —Nightstallion (?) 16:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept, pointless to busy the procedure any further. --Cat out 16:21, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Commons:Deletion requests/Image:2-chloroproprionic acid.png

Wrong file name. Correct filename at image:2-chloropropionic acid.png --Rifleman 82 16:08, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Plase use {{bad name}} for such requests. Kjetil_r 21:04, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Nyph.png

It's a duplicate, my fault, I spelled Nymph wrong so I changed it to the correct spelling. I changed it to Image:Nymph.png.--Aviper2k7 19:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Please use {{bad name}} for such requests. Kjetil_r 21:01, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Baldur Benedikt von Schirach.jpg

Photo from a 1939 German calendar, photographer's name indicated right below the image. Copyrighted in Germany. USHMM photo #45265. USHMM states "copyright USHMM", which is an indication that it indeed is copyrighted.[36]. Delete. Lupo 12:12, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

It is on the page of an official US government page, so it defenetly USGov. It can stay. So it says, it is copyrihgted by the USHMM, ao beacuse thet is an officiao USGov page, it can stay. --Edgar Allan Poe 21:24, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Delete, the US government has never produced German calendars, particularly not in 1939. No evidence that the photographer was employed by the US government in Washington. Thuresson 06:05, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. --Dodo 06:25, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Cuchoru061229.jpg

Wrong file is uploaded request S006221 03:42, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted as per nom. --Panther 18:55, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. Admins: The following debates until Madurai tank are on one subpage!

Both User:Vadakkan and User:venu62 are interested parties, apart from me, and have actively reverted my no-license & copyvio tags in these images. I'm not sure they can vote here. The admin who evaluates these images should keep this in mind. Srkris 19:18, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Look, you incorrectly tagged three images on my watchlist as lacking source / licensing information, when they actually had that information. I removed the tags on the assumption that since you were new here you'd used the wrong process, and suggested on your talk page that you bring the pictures here if you felt the licenses provided do not accurately reflect their copyright status (I don't think they're a problem, as I said then, but people often disagree about these things, which is why we have this forum). You've now brought them here, which is good. So what exactly is the problem? -- Vadakkan 22:31, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Fort_St._George,_Chennai.jpg

Copyvio - image lifted from http://www.portcities.org.uk/london/server/show/conMediaFile.6142/Fort-St-George-Madras-on-the-Coromandel-Coast.html without proper license --Srkris 10:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep, PD-old applies to the original work and no copyrightable modifications have been made to it. —LX (talk, contribs) 14:56, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep per LX. -- Vadakkan 18:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Temple Tangore 2.jpg

No source, no license --Srkris 10:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete, licensing information is there, but there's no source, so it can't be verified. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:00, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Comment User:Nataraja who originally contributed this (and scores of other pictures) is now, sadly, dead. Could people hold off closing this until his wife (fr:Utilisateur:Shakti) has been asked if she can clarify the status. -- Vadakkan 18:53, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep: I don't know what is the problem with this picture. Source and license are indicated : source is Serge Duchemin (my father) and license is CC-BY-SA. Shakti 22:57, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Gopuram-madurai.jpg

Copyvio - image lifted possibly from http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g170/richardhell77/200px-Gopuram-madurai.jpg without proper licensing information --Srkris 10:53, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep This could hardly be a copyvio of a 200x283px thumb. Once again, if there's an issue could people hold off closing this until his wife (fr:Utilisateur:Shakti) has been asked if she can clarify the status. -- Vadakkan 18:53, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comment I am not sure you can vote here for these images Vadakkan, since you are an interested party in the issue, and you've written to me before about retaining these images. Srkris 19:10, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Heh? This isn't a vote - see the top of the page - and all I was trying to do on [[User Talk:Srkris] was tell you the correct procedure for deleting images here. Anyway, we're all interested parties - we're all working towards the common interst of building a better encyclopedia. -- Vadakkan 19:17, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 CommentThat doesnt mean I can say keep or delete. I'm interested in it, as are you. Keep or delete should be mentioned by third parties. Srkris 19:19, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep: This picture is not a copyvio. User:Nataraja took it himself in 1997! Shakti 22:57, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep You can't copy a 200x283 pixel thumbnail and get an 535x756 pixel image without losing quality. The image name (200px-Gopuram-madurai.jpg) is typical for a thumbnail generated by the MediaWiki software. So IMHO someone copied the (thumbnailed) commons image to photobucket.com rather than the other way round. --88.134.44.28 11:21, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep per above. The image quality makes it obvious that it was not created from a thumbnail. Kafziel 16:43, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:TolkaappiyamExcerpt.png

Copyvio - image from http://www.tamil.net/projectmadurai/pub/pm0100/tolkap.pdf without proper license --Srkris 10:56, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep. The Tolkappiyam has been out of copyright for at least 1700 years. -- Vadakkan 18:55, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comment, The website from which this PDF snapshot was taken (Project Madurai) states "The etext files distributed FREE under the auspices of Project Madurai are for the personal usage of the individuals. Redistribution of these files in electronic or other forms to third parties and in the Web are prohibited, without prior permission obtained from Project Madurai authorities." Srkris 19:03, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comment The use of the Tolkappiyam text from whatever source is not copyrighted. Where this was taken off a screenshot of from a book shouldn't matter. - Venu62 19:08, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comment So Project Madurai's license message I've cited above for their ebooks is void? Please note this is not about the content of the ebook, but a snapshot of an ebook created by them. They hold copyrights for their ebooks, not the source content. Srkris 19:27, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comment In countries which recognise copyright in typographical layouts (as some European countries do), Project Madurai *might* be able to argue that it has a copyrightable interest in a text they have prepared (which, I suspect, is what they're talking about). However, neither India (where the screenshot was made) nor the United States (where Wikimedia's servers are located) recognise a copyright in typographical layouts, so for the purposes of Commons this image isn't a copyvio. -- Vadakkan 22:31, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Scanning etc. does not renew copyright; kept -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Ptolomy map.png

No source, no licensing information --Srkris 10:58, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep, in the public domain for over a millennium and a half. —LX (talk, contribs) 14:52, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep, people generally live less than 1700 years. -- Bryan (talk to me) 15:01, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comment, but how do we know its Ptolemy's map? Note that source is not given. Srkris 18:51, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep. The map isn't Ptolemy's map, it's the en:Tabula Peutingeriana. See here. The image seem to be a cropped version of the one here or at least from the same source. In any event, very clearly PD. -- Vadakkan 19:12, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comment, why did User:Venu62 remove this comment he made here just a few minutes back? Srkris 19:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comment because it was a mistake. I did make a scan, but never uploaded it. It was a few months ago. Venu62 19:40, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comment OK I will assume good faith, although you removed your comment after User:Vadakkan pointed out that it is not Ptolemy's map. This image still shows you as its uploader, though. And anyone can guess the source of the image. Its modified now (cropped), which may not meet the PD criteria. Srkris 19:51, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I never denied I uploaded it. It was in May 2006. I have done thousands of edits since then. I can upload my other scan if necessary. But as Vadakkan says, the current image should meet PD criteria. - Venu62 19:53, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Its clearly taken from the source pointed out by Vadakkan, and its cropped, which makes it a modified image. We dont know whether the source image itself is a modified one (or whether its a contemporary copy of the original). I will assume good faith regarding your upload source, that doesnt make it PD anyhow since its modified. Srkris 20:13, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 CommentMerely cropping an image does not create a new copyright; if the original is PD than the crop is PD too. If there are additional artistic or otherwise creative changes made as well, only then is the new work copyrighted by the new author (pending the expiration of copyright on the original work, as the new work is still a derivative). Carl Lindberg 05:06, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep, cropping the image makes it a derivative work. Hence the new croped image inherits the copyright status of the full image. /Lokal_Profil 01:16, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Maha shoretemple.jpg

Copyvio - image lifted from http://andamu.org/Booker/IMAGE/Maha_shoretemple.jpg without proper license --Srkris 11:02, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep - The original license stated "Photograph taken by a friend Ravi Krishna with Kodak digicam in 2001 and reproduced here with his permission." and was released under CC before Srkris removed it.

 Comment The statement is still there, why do you think I removed it? But you cant upload your friends' snaps without them expressly releasing their rights. Here it is clearly lifted from a website as I've mentioned above. Srkris

 Comment as the original uploader released it under CC, it is only natural that someone else might have reused the image from this encyclopedia. Venu62 19:10, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comment We cant presume what we want about copyrights Srkris 19:13, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

We have to assume good faith - Venu62 19:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comment That's not how copyrights work. Good faith is for user edits, not for copyvios. Srkris 19:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comment Without the assumption of goodfaith the project will collpase. Unless there is an obvious copyvio, then AGF should be assumed. Venu62 19:44, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comment I have pointed out an obvious copyvio. One doesnt assume good faith against obvious copyvios. Not after I know the mentality and past record of some persons. Srkris 19:53, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comment Keep to the discussion. No personal attacks please. As the image was released under CC, it is not uncommon for some others to use it in their websites as well. How can one be sure which image was uploaded first? - Venu62 19:56, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comment Image not found -- Bryan (talk to me) 09:55, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

 CommentProbably its been deleted now? It was there when I flagged this image copyvio. See [37]

 Comment This image has been on commons since March 2005, and apparently was on en wiki even before that. It's entirely possible that the mentioned site copied this image from Wikipedia, and not the other way around. It's even named the same, complete with a wikipedia-style underscore (or was, as the site appears to be completely down at the moment). Carl Lindberg 04:17, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept -- Bryan (talk to me) 08:31, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Madurai-tank.jpg

No source, no licensing information --Srkris 11:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete, licensing information is there, but there's no source, so it can't be verified. —LX (talk, contribs) 14:47, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep - The original image was from the French Wiki and was uploaded by User:Nataraja who contributed this (and scores of other pictures). Nataraja is now dead. As above, could you hold off closing this until his wife (fr:Utilisateur:Shakti) has been asked if she can clarify the status. - Venu62 19:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comment Its a circular reference. French wikipedia again points to this image in commons Srkris 19:12, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comment That's because it was moved to the Commons from the French Wiki - Venu62 19:18, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comment Be it may, its not verifiable, and another user cant verify. First we at wikipedia dont know the uploader personally, nor whether he was married or is dead, nor whether the said Shakti is his wife, nor whether she has the authority or knowledge about these images. Srkris 19:22, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comment Read the WP policy of Assuming Good Faith - Venu62 19:24, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Comment I have had a taste of that. Srkris 19:37, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep: Source is User:Nataraja and license is CC-BY-SA. Shakti 22:57, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:ArtPoster.jpg

Described by the uploader as his own work, however it appears that he only took the photo and does not hold the copyright of the artwork. Apparently this image has been uploaded before by the same user and was deleted as copyvio. Regards, High on a tree 14:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC) High on a tree 14:15, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete repeated copyvio. —LX (talk, contribs) 14:30, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted --ALE! ¿…? 16:40, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Nephtys hombergii.png

(high res version available at image:nephtys hombergii.jpg) Lycaon 20:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete —LX (talk, contribs) 04:15, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted, please use {{duplicate}} next time --ALE! ¿…? 16:41, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Olymp.jpg

I doubt that this is the uploader's own work or {{Copyrighted free use}}. It's a photo of the japanese singer en:BoA. "Author: BoA" and "Source: own work" doesn't match, and this user uploaded another copyrighted work (Image:Prince3121.jpg, cover of a Prince album) claiming it too being "own work".

The same applies to Image:Yui02.jpg. --88.134.44.28 20:41, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete both, copyvios -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:10, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete, bogus licence. —LX (talk, contribs) 04:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

both deleted --ALE! ¿…? 16:45, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Online poker adverts on London Underground w-o ads.jpg

Derivative work 88.134.44.28 20:46, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted --ALE! ¿…? 16:48, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Online poker adverts on London Underground.jpg

Derivative work 88.134.44.28 20:47, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted --ALE! ¿…? 16:51, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:EHusserl.jpg

Taken from http://www.ildiogene.it/EncyPages/Ency=Husserl.html, no indication of free usage there. Regards, High on a tree 01:40, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 09:20, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:CDiaz.jpg

Taken from http://www.chasque.net/umbrales/rev150/13.htm, no indication of free usage there. Regards, High on a tree 01:44, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 09:22, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Maritain.jpg

Taken from http://www.nd.edu/Departments/Maritain/ndjmc.htm - "© Copyright 2006 by the Jacques Maritain Center. All rights reserved." Regards, High on a tree 01:33, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete, bogus licence. —LX (talk, contribs) 04:34, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete. If you click on the photo, it gives the following credits (and no indication of free licensing)

Photograph of Jacques Maritain 
Princeton, NJ: 27 or 28 October 1962 
photo credit: John Howard Griffin

--Speight 05:14, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 09:17, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Carlos Diaz.jpg

Taken from http://www.personalismo.org/_private/filosofos/fildiaz.htm, which says "© Asociación Española de Personalismo" - no indication of free usage. Regards, High on a tree 01:46, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 09:23, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:GabrielMarcel.jpg

Taken from http://www.lemoyne.edu/gms/gmbio.htm, no indication of free usage there. Regards, High on a tree 01:49, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 09:25, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Marcel.jpg

Source link doesn't work, photo is the same as Image:GabrielMarcel.jpg which is Copyrighted free use without proof too, uploader has made a lot of other dubious licence claims. Regards, High on a tree 01:52, 11 January 2007 (UTC) --High on a tree 01:54, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 09:27, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Nicolas.JPG

Outside project scope. ~MDD4696 03:07, 11 January 2007 (UTC) --~MDD4696 03:10, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete —LX (talk, contribs) 04:40, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 09:32, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:1165970983 f.jpg

Outside project scope. ~MDD4696 03:08, 11 January 2007 (UTC) --~MDD4696 03:08, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete —LX (talk, contribs) 04:40, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 09:35, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:1164514676 f.jpg

Outside project scope. ~MDD4696 03:08, 11 January 2007 (UTC) --~MDD4696 03:09, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete —LX (talk, contribs) 04:40, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 09:42, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Bill-t.jpg

No source, sure not PD-Old GeorgHH 12:42, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Delete The subject died in 1971, so PD-old is very unlikely. -- Bryan (talk to me) 13:48, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Delete. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 09:49, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Dremelspitze.jpg

I am shown in this picture, but have never given permission to publish it. -- Arne Alex

Deleted. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 09:53, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Charadehepburn.jpg

image is a screenshot from a public domain movie, however it is stamped with a source website which displays a copyright notice "Copyright © 1998 - 2003 Audrey Hepburn - L'Ange des Enfants. The material of this website may not be copied without permission ". There are other images of Hepburn that can be legitimately used, so to use one from this website is inappropriate. --Rossrs 13:57, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep, so long as the original photograph is in the public domain, the author of the website from whence it came probably does not have a legitimate claim of copyright with respect to the photograph. —LX (talk, contribs) 14:38, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

My main concern is the URL stamp. Could the problem be fixed simply by removing it? Rossrs 06:52, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I have removed the stamp and have uploaded a new version of the same image. Rossrs 11:42, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

• Kept. Samulili 18:21, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Audrey Hepburn and Cary Grant 1.jpg

Image is a screenshot from a public domain movie, however it is stamped with a source website which displays a copyright notice "Copyright © 1998 - 2003 Audrey Hepburn - L'Ange des Enfants. The material of this website may not be copied without permission ". There are other images of Hepburn that can be legitimately used so to use one from this website is not appropriate. Image also appears to be a publicity photo rather than a screenshot as it differs slightly to the scene in the film. --Rossrs 13:56, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Keep; so long as the original photograph is in the public domain, the author of the website from whence it came probably does not have a legitimate claim of copyright with respect to the photograph. —LX (talk, contribs) 14:37, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

As above, if the problem can be fixed just by removing the URL, maybe that's the way to go. Rossrs 06:56, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I have removed the stamp and have uploaded a new version of the same image. Rossrs 11:43, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

• Kept. Samulili 18:20, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Belfast mural 12.jpg

Derivative work without proper license based on "This is a derivative work, the artist who painted the mural holds a copyright. Haukurth 20:20, 2 September 2006 (UTC)" Jusjih 15:06, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Likewise, Image:Belfast loyalist mural 1.jpg would also be a derivative work.--Jusjih 15:20, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete Concur. I don't think Irish freedom of panorama extends to 2D works such as murals. Lupo 16:24, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete Paintings and other two-dimensional works are not buildings, sculptures or "works of artistic craftsmanship", and hence are not covered by §93 of the Irish Copyright and Related Rights Act, 2000. -- Vadakkan 20:16, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 17:00, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Tamil_girls_in_Tiruvanamalai.jpg

No verifiable license obtained from creator --Srkris 10:24, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete, "uploaded with permission," but where's the OTRS reference? —LX (talk, contribs) 15:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I've emailed the photographer asking for formal permission. --Ranveig 18:50, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to delete this one, although I am very hesitant due to the enormous use [38] in Wikipedia. I'll give this one seven more days to get the permission. -- Bryan (talk to me) 08:35, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

You wrote in January I'll give this one seven more days. Now, it´s April... Chaddy 17:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Deleted: License not verifyable / A.J. 15:36, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.===Image:Tarr steps clapper bridge.jpg=== User uploaded copyrighted image of British stamp and mistagged it with a free license. - 87.209.70.231 18:08, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

• It has now been replaced by Image:Tarr_Steps_01.jpg in the Wikipedia article I originally found it used. - 131.211.210.10 08:55, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Not free. --MichaelMaggs 07:25, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Karte Bezirk Ústí nad Orlicí.jpg

Copy from http://mesta.obce.cz/vyhledat2.asp?okres=3611&vzhled=ul --AHZ 22:37, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete copyvio -- Bryan (talk to me) 09:51, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

On hold, uploader has not be notified. Please perform all steps as explained on {{delete}}! -- Bryan (talk to me) 15:55, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Karte Bezirk Ústí nad Orlicí.jpg is copy from http://mesta.obce.cz/vyhledat2.asp?okres=3611&vzhled=ul --AHZ 22:35, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted waited long enough -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:15, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Japanese TKX.png

Copyrigthted image.This image from Japanese goverment white paper.In Japan,goverment has copyrights of white paper.--Los688 14:02, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

ja:著作権付き画像。この画像は日本政府発行の白書より取られたもの。日本政府発行の白書は日本政府が著作権を持つ。--Los688 14:02, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Delete Surely this image comes from "防衛白書," published in 2005, by w:Ministry of Defense (Japan). Works that is neither announcements nor notifications by goverments of Japan are copyrightable per article 13 of the copyright law of Japan. --Kareha 12:22, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted--Shizhao 15:30, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Shenyang from International Space Station.jpg

low quality, no useful information Cariner 20:34, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Speedy keep and revert removal of image description, high quality, unique information. -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:16, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Category:Sule paya

Created by error, the good one is Category:Sule pagoda Colegota 16:28, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Please tag such categories as {{bad name}} in the future. Kjetil_r 17:22, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Buber.jpg

Taken from [39], which says: Copyright © 1999 by Miles H. Hodges. All Rights Reserved. regards, High on a tree 01:20, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted --ALE! ¿…? 16:57, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Mounier.jpg

Taken from http://www.amisdelavie.org/article.php?id_article=405; no indication of free usage there. Regards, High on a tree 01:29, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted --ALE! ¿…? 17:01, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Guardini.jpg

The given source page (http://aphorismen-archiv.de/autoren/autoren_g/guardini.html) says "© 2000 - Nachdruck und Weiterverbreitung, auch auszugsweise, nur mit ausdrücklicher Genehmigung." Regards, High on a tree 01:35, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted --ALE! ¿…? 17:08, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:DSCF2285.JPG

I really hate to nominate this, because it's just sooooo cute. However, it is a copyrighted figurine of a copyrighted character (the Dalek). Therefore it should be deleted. EX-TER-MIN-ATE! EX-TER-MIN-ATE! EX-TER-MIN-ATE! Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass ^demandez 18:23, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

• Exterminate, copyvio. —Angr 20:32, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
• Exterminate per bastique. -- Bryan (talk to me) 20:38, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
• Kill, copyvio Kjetil_r 20:43, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
• Fire up the TARDIS, take a little trip, and change the mind of the user so they don't upload it. Failing that... Delete ++Lar: t/c 21:16, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
•  Comment The word "Dalek" is trademarked (altought it has evolved into a eneric term so it may not be valid), but is the character design really copyrighted? Verify that fist. Otherwise it's doesn't look good for the entire Category:Doctor Who. // Liftarn

Deleted. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 14:30, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:DLP Castle on a Hill.JPG

Very bad crop, and we have other photos of the Sleeping Beauty's castle. Username9 11:17, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted (out of scope) --ALE! ¿…? 08:38, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Template:Image Caption/Flaming cocktails.jpg/gu

This template looks like a mistake or a test. I cannot read the non-English text. Sorry. Willscrlt 08:15, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted --ALE! ¿…? 09:50, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Rona Ambrose1.jpg

No indication for GFDL or Cc-by-sa found on the given source. Copyright link: http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/copyright/terms_Conditions.asp?Language=E#Copyrights GeorgHH 20:26, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

 Delete, bogus licence. Said copyright statement is linked to from directly adjacent to the photograph on the MP's profile. —LX (talk, contribs) 04:42, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Oppose There are many pictures of Canadian politicians from the same website on Wikipedia. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:PeterMacKay.jpg, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Stockwellburtday.jpg, ETC. PLEASE DO NOT DELETE MY IMAGE BECAUSE FOR SOME REASON THE IMAGES ON WIKIPEDIA(FROM THE SAME WEBSITE)ARN'T DELETED. THIS(IMO)IS NOT FAIR. FellowWikipedian 01:22, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Oppose I do too agree with fellowwikipedian. His/her point, though I do not approve of him/her to type in caps, makes alot of sense. Why are the images on Wikipedia okayed but the image of Rona Ambrose on Commons, which claims to be a Shared media repository!, not okay?? 205.189.97.202 01:37, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Delete To answer 205.*'s question: because these photos are copyrighted and not released under a free license, they are used at the English Wikipedia under a "fair use" claim. The commons does not accept "fair use" images. The commons is a repository of free images only. Lupo 14:43, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Comment Yeah, but I uploaded an image on Wikipedia from the same website and they deleted it. RUDE. FellowWikipedian 00:45, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Not rude, efficient. Wikimedia isn't youtube, ... we want free content. Sorry. Delete. --Gmaxwell 18:04, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

 Delete Image is fair use. --|EPO| 18:10, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Image is not released under a free license. Therefore conflicts with Commons' policies. --|EPO| 18:17, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Vangelis NASA.jpg

NASA pictures are in PD when they are work of its employee. This image is found at the NASA website, but that doesn't mean it's made by NASA. Judging the image, I doubt it is. --user:Qviri 00:36, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

But before deletion, can we at least get some confirmation on who's the photographer first? --Andylkl 05:57, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

•  Comment I haven't found this particular image anywhere else on the web. It doesn't look like the classical, glossy, styled publicity shot. I think it's entirely possible that the NASA person who conducted that interview took that photo. (The background looks like this was taken on the spot, in an improvised setting.) On their credits page they make no mention of any external contributor. I suggest asking at marsoutreach AT jpl DOT nasa DOT gov—maybe they'd even be willing to give us a larger version of that image... Lupo 08:02, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Mail sent. -- Bryan (talk to me) 10:48, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, guys. :) --Andylkl 06:27, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

• And, Bryan? Got any answer? Lupo 23:35, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

No, never had. I would say  Delete -- Bryan (talk to me) 22:05, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 10:32, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:Tyminrada.jpg

Taken from a GFDL website, but the image itself seems to be a television screenshot, almost certainly not GFDL. At any rate, there's no way to be sure without knowing the ultimate source. —Angr 20:30, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

deleted --ALE! ¿…? 10:43, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

[edit] Image:NewHorizons@Jupiter.jpg

not PD, see [40]: "New Horizons images on this Web site are generally available for non-commercial educational and public information purposes" --Shizhao 04:10, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

But it's free, just change the licence.ooups NC, i'm wrong, sorry -->  Delete. VIGNERON * ^discut. 16:11, 12 January 2007 (UTC)