< April 1	April 3 >

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

The result of the discussion was: keep as amended Skier Dude (talk) 06:58, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unable to verify source/license. Kelly ^hi! 00:44, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep image. This is a scan of an image that was published in 1903 to publicize The Duchess of Dantzic, a comic opera produced at the Lyric Theatre in London in 1903. It's clearly in the public domain in both the UK and the US, notwithstanding the illegal claim of copyright by someone on Flickr. -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:03, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – The suggestion that this image is not free is unsustainable. The image actually says on it who originally published it, viz The Play Pictorial. The show in question was reviewed in the issue of September 1903, pp. 145–60, a copy of which I have in front of me. The same image can be seen there, though the postcard one is a better quality reproduction. I think perhaps the licence tag should be ((PD-US-1923-abroad)) rather than ((PD-US)) – Tim riley (talk) 09:14, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A pre-1923 publication is listed, so this appears to be free in the United States. Insufficient information to determine UK copyright status, so can't be moved to Commons. In order to be in the public domain in the UK, it is required that the photo either is anonymous, or taken by someone who died before 1942. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:41, 2 April 2012 (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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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 ⚡ 01:03, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Erasmo Ramírez.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

License not clear from author comments on Flickr page. Kelly ^hi! 00:53, 2 April 2012 (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: delete, erring to the side of caution. Unfortunately, the copyright status of this image is not verifiable. — ξ ^xplicit 21:35, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:19thESCSoldiers.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

Can't find photo in photostream. Kelly ^hi! 02:25, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can't tell you about the photostream, but it was there, and at the time I confirmed that the license for all the files on the flicker was CC /w Attribution. Best course of action would be to confirm the status by contacting 19th ESC PAO. Sephiroth storm (talk) 17:35, 3 April 2012 (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: keep. — ξ ^xplicit 21:35, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Potentially a CSD:F9, but I cannot find this version of this logo on the web page cited. Other files uploaded by this user are unambiguously copyvios claiming they are PD-US when they are simply downloaded from the Internet. WP:DUCK applies? –Fredddie ™ 03:56, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably simple enough for ((PD-textlogo)). January (talk) 17:47, 2 April 2012 (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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:08, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

The older versions are licensed as PD but the latest version is tagged "Copyright: Caroline Gamble, 2011" and that is not ok for Wikipedia. MGA73 (talk) 12:27, 2 April 2012 (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 ⚡ 22:43, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

License is disputed: "Should be checked: Photographer ok, but painter?" MGA73 (talk) 12:40, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The painting of "Lawhill" was commisioned by my father, master mariner Henry Cløigaard Christensen, who died in 1974 and painted by his uncle, the late Martin Bech, who died in the 50'es. I have inherited the painting, and it is hanging on the wall in my waiting room where it is seen by thousands every year. I uploaded the Photograph of the ship, as I thought it would be nice for the wider public who might have an interest in "Lawhill". Hope you'll leave it on Wikipedia. hcmann — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hcmann (talk • contribs) 14:45, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry we have to be picky. Unless we have permission from the copyright owner of the painting, we cannot use the photo other than as "fair use" (i.e. not on Swedish or German Wikipedia, and not at full resolution here). As the artist is in your family you might be able to get the needed permission, probably from the cousins of your father. If that is not possible, photos of the painting cannot be legally used other than in very restricted circumstances, depending on the relevant jurisdiction (are you from Denmark? Netherlands? Britain? USA? Has the painting been shown publicly?). --LPfi (talk) 21:12, 3 April 2012 (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) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:43, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ecartan.jpeg (delete | talk | history | logs).

See commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ecartan.jpeg; no comment on whether this could be fair use or not. Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:55, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The file comes from the archive of the Mathematics Research Institute at Oberwolfach. Most images there are freely available but, checking the copyright which is normally creative commons attribution-sharealike 2.0 (see [1]), that is only applicable if the photograph is labelled Copyright:MFO. This photograph is not so labelled, so is one of the few images in their collection not covered by the CC license. I cannot tell when this photograph was taken. Mathsci (talk) 17:30, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have uploaded a new image: a photograph taken in 1904. The source, which contains a long biography, has two images of Cartan from 1931, and they appear to be contemporanesous with or slightly later than this image. Mathsci (talk) 18:25, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

About the 1904 photo, are you saying that it was first published in the linked 1993 book? If so, and if that book was approved by the copyright holder, then the 1904 photo will remain copyrighted in the United States until the end of 2047. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:01, 2 April 2012 (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: keep. — ξ ^xplicit 21:35, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chief Bill Lee.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Likely a city photograph, no evidence it's made by the florida record Secret ^account 18:21, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Reading the court decision, I don't think there is any doubt that a police chief is an "public agent" as considered within the purpose of that statute. Unlike city-owned artwork (which has commercial value), an official portrait is a public record regularly used by the public agency in its public communications (e.g. website)

in FL, public records are public domain. That principle doesn't stop at the city-county line.

If you find that logic unsound, worry not-- the case for fair use on the shooting of Trayvon Martin and bio is overwhelming. --HectorMoffet (talk) 22:58, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for the claim of public domain to hold we need to be sure that it the case, would recommend the up-loader seeks to have an WP:ORTS ticket filed, in the absence of that it should be deleted as no FUR can be made as the image is replaceable with a free one. Mt king ^(edits) 09:08, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The Florida constitution says that any "public record made or received in connection with the official business of any public body", including municipalities" in the State of Florida are barred from copyright protection, so they are in the public domain: See Copyright status of work by the Florida government. So the purported copyright statement from the City of Sanford appears to be copyfraud. -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:06, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - ((PD-FLGov)) Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:14, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Does not meet "public record made or received in connection with the official business of any public body" Also the page upon which it is sourced makes the claim of copyright. [2] Given these two instances the image is non-free and other images circulate from press releases which could be substituted. Second note: I am removing the image on the 'Shooting of Trayvon Martin' which is the only use under WP:IRELEV as Chief Bill Lee played a minor role and is not the focus of the article. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 15:12, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sure it does. Florida's courts have been ridiculously liberal about applying the public domain tag to basically anything done under the auspices of the state unless the state opts the institution out (notably, that includes universities). Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:07, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Even governmental jurisdictions commit copyfraud sometimes; for example, Wheaton v. Peters ensures that all laws are PD, but that doesn't stop Idaho from claiming copyright on its code. Do you dispute the idea that Florida releases its works into the public domain? This is definitely a situation described by the wording at ((PD-FLGov)); if you don't believe that the statement on the template is correct, please nominate it for deletion. Nyttend (talk) 01:39, 25 April 2012 (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 ⚡ 01:03, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Boys basketball3 web.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Given the lack of exif data and the uploader's history I suspect this file is not the work of the uploader. Eeekster (talk) 20:01, 2 April 2012 (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 ⚡ 01:03, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:SDMB Sudler Trophy.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Appears to be a 1991 item. No freedom of panorama for trophies in the United States. Stefan2 (talk) 20:36, 2 April 2012 (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 ⚡ 01:03, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Orphaned image (collage of 6 images). Description says "made from the images already present in Wikipedia, but does not source or show license for each image. Not PD-self if images came from other sources. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 21:40, 2 April 2012 (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 ⚡ 01:03, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vgconsoles collage.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Orphaned image includes an image that was deleted due to no license. Therefore license cannot be verified and status of use is unknown. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 21:51, 2 April 2012 (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 ⚡ 01:03, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Derivative work of non-free packaging. Stefan2 (talk) 22:05, 2 April 2012 (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 ⚡ 01:03, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Terrys White Choc Smasher.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Derivative work of copyrighted packaging. Stefan2 (talk) 22:07, 2 April 2012 (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) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:43, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Giglio 2010.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Outdoor artwork. Unknown country, so FOP status can't be determined. According to his user page, the uploader lives in the United States but often travels to other countries. Stefan2 (talk) 22:17, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This photo was taken by myself in Glen Cove, New York, USA. The artwork that you refer to was created by myself, however it is the photo that I uploaded. The structure that is represented in this photo is created as a symbol and in honor of San Paolino of Nola, Italy. The structure (giglio) artwork is destroyed and replaced yearly. Although the artwork may be copied from an original art piece created several hundred years ago, there is no known copyright and no known "one" person who created the original piece. Therefore I am requesting re-consideration in your "possible" un-free file status. --Michael LoCascio 04:32, 3 April 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glmike523 (talk • contribs)

- Why do you think that the artwork isn't copyrighted? If anonymous and installed since 1978, it would appear that it remains copyrighted for 120 years since creation. If anonymous and installed before 1978 and since 1923, it would appear that it either is in the public domain for formality reasons or that it is copyrighted for 95 years since installation. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:56, 3 April 2012 (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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:08, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:834B SE Box.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

Derivative work of complex packaging. Stefan2 (talk) 22:27, 2 April 2012 (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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:08, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

From here. According to the file information page, this is the uploader's own blog, although I suppose we need OTRS confirmation of that. Many of the uploader's other images are from the same blog. Stefan2 (talk) 22:42, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you're trying to say, but I definitely took this picture, and uploaded it here on purpose, so I don't see what the problem is. Ninjalectual (talk) 00:42, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no way to prove that. Please either follow the instructions at WP:CONSENT or add a statement somewhere on the blog confirming that the blog and the Wikipedia account belong to the same person. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:59, 3 April 2012 (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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:08, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Collegiates.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

Dubious own work. Stefan2 (talk) 22:46, 2 April 2012 (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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:08, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Salome voyt.tif (delete | talk | history | logs).

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

File:Contemplate voyt.tif (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:Dream voyt.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Likely uploaded by the artist himself, but probably needs OTRS confirmation. Stefan2 (talk) 22:53, 2 April 2012 (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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:08, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Abed Abdi Land Day poster 1980.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

1980 poster. CC licence unlikely true. Country unknown. If Iranian, it is likely ((PD-Iran)) because of the short term for works for hire. If not Iranian, it is probably still copyrighted. Stefan2 (talk) 22:58, 2 April 2012 (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.