The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:09, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GFDL license not currently verifiable. Needs confirmation via WP:OTRS. Easily replaced with a user-made free image. Videmus Omnia 02:40, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:09, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

License is ((PD-USGov)), but no indication of that at given source, which is a organization with a copyright statement on its front page. Videmus Omnia 06:38, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Theresa knott (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:09, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

no evidence that the uploader is the copyright owner bluemask ^(talk) 07:34, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Theresa knott (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:09, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

no evidence that the uploader is the copyright owner bluemask ^(talk) 07:36, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:09, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This look like a screenshot. Rettetast 14:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:09, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader was indefinitely blocked for continued copyright violations in regard to images. Source link goes only to a forum - I was unable to find the image itself while viewing the forum and no evidence exists that this image was released by its creator. Shell ^babelfish 15:49, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Nobody has provided any indication that the copyright status is legitimate and even if it is legitimate, this jpg is not worthy of Wikipedia. This image states that the image came from a group called Georgian Youth against Russian troops but there is no evidence that such a group exists so this image looks like astroturfing. Pocopocopocopoco 03:44, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as I6 by Kbdank71 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:09, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

image has 2 conflicting license tags After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 15:54, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as I1 by Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:09, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial processing and editiong of image, addition of text and graphics. Seems like pro work. No license or source info added w/upload. Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 16:11, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Butseriouslyfolks (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:09, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a publicty poster ShakespeareFan00 17:22, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Butseriouslyfolks (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 01:09, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User uploaded image with non-free permission (first and second time, both deleted), and most recently uploaded the same image under GFDL CC-By-SA, claiming own authorship. Relevant discussion. – Matthew A. Lockhart ^(talk) 18:19, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The author has given me the free license for this image. I guess I've selected the wrong license for it. Mike86 11:00, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then you should not claim that you are the creator of the image. Unless the creator specifically said the image could be used in a commercial manner, it should be treated as unfree.– Matthew A. Lockhart ^(talk) 14:00, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Can't sleep, clown will eat me (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:09, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

author claimed to have made it himself, but it is a combination of copyrighted images — Busjack 19:00, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Moreschi (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 01:09, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly a picture of jabba The Hut - GFDL claim but no evidence? ShakespeareFan00 19:46, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Nick (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:09, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Says in summary has a private license. Bassgoonist Talk 19:58, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Butseriouslyfolks (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:09, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Claim of permission to use copyrighted photograph, however, the type of permission and licensing granted by the copyright holder is not detailed. No permission claim was lodged with WP:OTRS. — Shell ^babelfish 23:02, 11 July 2007 (UTC).[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.