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 Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:59, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

possible blatant copyvio, user claims ownership of a screenshot of Google -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email guestbook complaints 01:45, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The only way this could be used would be with a claim of fair use. I don't think this would meet fair use requirements, though; it doesn't illustrate anything that couldn't be illustrated through words alone ("an English search is like _____, with X number of 1989-related images; a Chinese search is like _____..." etc.), or linking to a source that describes the two search results (since we ourselves can't link to Google search results as sources). Or, of course, the reader can do the searches themselves and see. In any case, this image is OR in addition to copyvio. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 19:05, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In a thumb, it is hard to see much at all at such low resolution. Note that it is also lossy to have Windows screenshots in JPEG (as opposed to PNG). Otherwise, use the "fair use website screenshot" tag. Only do this though if you are absolutely certain that the image aids the article and proves a point. Where I found the image was at the bottom of the Censorship in the PRC article, which I see as almost impossible to notice unless you go looking for it. Finally, I am not sure if this applies, but there may (or may not) be an issue of having a screenshot of unfree software (i.e. IE) without the software tag (Again I must stress that I am unsure on this one; I have never used the software tag before). -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email guestbook complaints 06:48, 27 April 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:12, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Enforcer_{Office of the secret service} 02:19, 20 April 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.