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 After Midnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:39, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mo and Mr Steinbrenner Monument.PNG (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Delete: this image was originally uploaded as a non-free image with an incomplete fair-use rationale (no "purpose for use") and claimed to be sourced from the Major League Baseball website. The uploader revised the image to a "cc-by" tag and removed the fair-use rationale template. The actual image comes from a copyright video found on this MBL webpage at approximately 14:40 minutes in, so the licence claim is clearly false. Besides which it is an image of a modern US sculpture where freedom of panorama is no permitted, so it is a derivative work without the artist's permission. ww2censor (talk) 02:21, 23 September 2010 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 05:39, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Justo armas.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• we know very little about how this image was first published, and as such determining PD is difficult; we have no proof it is in the public domain. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:35, 23 September 2010 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 05:39, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Meyerhold revizor.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• I don't see how we can tell if this is public domain or not: the source isn't specific enough that we can tell who the author of the photograph is. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:44, 23 September 2010 (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 After Midnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:39, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:HkPartizan.gif (delete | talk | history | logs).

• sports logo; no source; if legit, uploader would not be (c) holder Skier Dude (talk 05:24, 23 September 2010 (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 After Midnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:39, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vk partizan logo.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• sports logo; no source; if legit, uploader would not be (c) holder Skier Dude (talk 05:25, 23 September 2010 (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 After Midnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:39, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Zaptivke.gif (delete | talk | history | logs).

• sports logo; no source; if legit, uploader would not be (c) holder Skier Dude (talk 05:25, 23 September 2010 (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 Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 00:20, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:GretaGarbo1920s.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Unless this was in the first 3 years of the twenties, the copyright has not expired (Photoplay appears to have renewed their copyrights). Magog the Ogre (talk) 06:02, 23 September 2010 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 05:39, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:ThompsonD.1032.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• This file is likely a copyright violation as it is a photograph of a piece of artwork and has no fair use claim or rationale. Smartse (talk) 14:43, 23 September 2010 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 05:39, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:ThompsonD.1033.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• This file is likely a copyright violation as it is a photograph of a piece of artwork and has no fair use claim or rationale. Smartse (talk) 14:43, 23 September 2010 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 05:39, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nickbax humanstudio.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Is the reproduction condition "Any use of the image must be attributed 'Welcome to the Shalesmoor Triangle' [C] 2009 Shaun Bloodworth / Humanstudio" acceptable? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:00, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• I have contacted Humanstudio and they have agreed with the reproduction condition "Any use of the image must be attributed 'Welcome to the Shalesmoor Triangle' [C] 2009 Shaun Bloodworth / Humanstudio" --User:Davjck —Preceding undated comment added 15:54, 23 September 2010 (UTC).[reply]
  • That's not my point - my point is whether it is acceptable for Wikipedia to use an image where it is obliged to pass on that condition to anyone else taking it for their own use. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:29, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Even if Humanstudio gave User:Davjck permission, then he has to follow the Open-source Ticket Request System process. Uploading am image saying that they give persisson is not enough.--ARTEST4ECHO ^talk 16:38, 23 September 2010 (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 discussion was: Closed - Image is now tagged as non-free. --ARTEST4ECHO ^talk 14:17, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:NAMBLA logo.svg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• This was tagged as ((PD-textlogo)) and ((trademark))but was reverted as another user felt that it was a copyrighted image. Propose retagging as pd-textlogo as the image contains simple text and the two letters placed on an angle are not original enough to give it copyright protection. Terrillja _talk 15:25, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Being the other user mentioned I think this file should be considered unfree, and we should retain its present licencing templates and Fair Use rationale. There may also be the need to emphasize that the issue here is not whether or not to delete this file, merely how to perceive it. __meco (talk) 15:38, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This image is currently tagged as non-free. If there is a dispute with the rationale, please tag the image with ((dfu)) or list it at WP:Non-free content review. Otherwise, unless there is another reason for listing here, the listing will be closed by an administrator and the image kept. AnomieBOT⚡ 00:20, 26 September 2010 (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 discussion was: Closed. Changed to ((Non-free logo)) --ARTEST4ECHO ^talk 16:47, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ligue Magnus.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Resolution looks too high for fair use to me, but I'm not certain of the requirements -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:26, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Addationally the image appear here, here and here.--ARTEST4ECHO ^talk 16:44, 23 September 2010 (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.