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

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:38, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Dominique is dead" was an English film, not American. URAA should've restored the copyright. 72.88.56.113 (talk) 02:16, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:38, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Dominique is dead" was an English film, not American. 72.88.56.113 (talk) 02:19, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete all: See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials#Granting us permission to copy material already online for details on how to confirm that these are freely licensed, seeing as how they are already on other sites. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 17:25, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also nominating:

• File:Sean rusling 3.jpg
• File:Ryan lonie 1.jpg
• File:Nick maxwell 8.jpg
• File:Paul medhurst 19.jpg
• File:Dale thomas 1911.jpg
• File:Dale thomas 325.jpg
• File:Dale thomas 2663.jpg
• File:Dale thomas 2664.jpg
• File:Dale thomas 3311.jpg
• File:Nathan buckley 180.jpg

This user's images are highly suspect. A few are professional quality and others are blurry. They have EXIF data from different cameras or from photoshop. All of them have the same naming convention and are web resolution so presumably they came from some website. The claim of authorship is questionable and needs to be verified. --B (talk) 12:35, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I actually took these photos and have allowed them to be uploaded onto different websites. I like to provide people with copyright free photos of Collingwood players that they can use for wallpapers and other things. The reason the quality is so different is because I use different cameras, not just one camera. I don't see any reason to delete my images since I took them. - DThomas —Preceding unsigned comment added by DThomas (talk • contribs) 06:20, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was: Delete; source may be established, but evidence of PD licensing is needed at the source. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 17:28, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Source from URL provided; URL is now broken. ZooFari 18:05, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed the URL. Seemed kinda like an obvious fix to me.--Rockfang (talk) 00:16, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 13:17, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Screenshot of a website, which is not necessary for articles and violates image use policy ZooFari 18:17, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 13:17, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Doubt it is PD and uploader claims it's his own work ZooFari 18:21, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the debate was: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons, please nominate it for deletion there if you feel it is non-free. AnomieBOT⚡ 21:31, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

altered version of a non free image [1] [2], source is unclear Mopenstein (talk) 20:51, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

fuck it Mopenstein (talk) 12:30, 13 August 2009 (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.