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 TheCoffee (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:38, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced; likely to have been copied from a copyrighted website. No evidence given that uploader is the owner. Looking at his talk page, user also uploaded unsourced files in the past, which were subsequently deleted. Xeltran (talk) 02:31, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I agree this File must be deleted as soon as possible. There's source to prove that the uploader is the owner of this file, and besides that the uploader doesn't follow the rules on where he/she will post this file in every articles.

Shin368 (talk) 05:27, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete. Obviously taken from Google Earth and we can get a free alternative for this. --seav (talk) 13:42, 1 May 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 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:38, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User re-uploaded the File:13susanboyle.jpg, assumed copyright by Deadline Press & Picture Agency 84.44.237.93 (talk) 12:24, 26 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 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⚡ 18:38, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's copyright character SpongeBob SquarePants. William Avery (talk) 14:43, 26 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 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⚡ 18:38, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged ((PD-self)). This is nearly identical to File:Blue Mockingbird Territory Map.gif; the only difference is that the legend has been changed slightly. Clearly this is a derivative work of the other image, which is tagged ((cc-by-sa-3.0)) but is sourced to NatureServe.org and includes the following copyright notice: "Copyright Notice: © 2007 NatureServe, 1101 Wilson Boulevard, 15th Floor, Arlington Virginia 22209, U.S.A. All Rights Reserved. Each document delivered from this server or web site may contain other proprietary notices and copyright information relating to that document. The following citation should be used in any published materials which reference the web site." There is no evidence that NatureServe ever released the original map under a free license, and it is quite clear that the map nominated here is a direct derivative work. —Bkell (talk) 17:42, 26 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 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 F1 by Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:38, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unfree and unneeded file. mynameinc 18:39, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw. I was not aware of its need in the Time Machine article, which I thought was non-existent due to the red link on the upload page. mynameinc 18:52, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• This file was found on my iMac's Applications folder. It is a larger resolution image than the one currently displayed on Time Machine (Apple software) and was found as an image in the contents of the application's file. The logo is Apple Inc.'s design and is entirely their work. The following is how I found this image:

1. Open Finder
2. In sidebar, click Applications
3. Right-click Time Machine
4. Click "Show Package Contents"
5. Open "Resources"
6. The file is "backup.icns"

All content, including the image, is owned by Apple Inc. I do not own any part as this image is purely for Wikipedia purposes.

• 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⚡ 01:24, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Some time ago I uploaded a lower res PNG (128x128) of the same icon to illustrate Time Machine (Apple software). I don't know why the uploader decided to replace it with a higher res version. I believe the low res is preferred for fair use. I have replaced the image in the article with the lower res version; consequently, this image is not needed. Fletcher (talk) 22:03, 1 May 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 Sandahl (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is tagged as being public domain as a work of US Federal Government, but is actually from a website maintained by Pennsylvania state government. I see no indication that work on that website is public domain. J Milburn (talk) 21:51, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed Unfree - here from the Pennsylvania Legislature, not a federal source. Ergo, delete.--A. Gorilla (talk) 23:27, 26 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 discussion was: Speedy delete; no evidence of permission. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 02:29, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This was recently tagged as lacking permission, but I declined the deletion because the source given is "taken myself". If we tagged all images with such a source as lacking permission, we'd lose a lot of images, so having that text alone indicating a lack of permission doesn't really make sense to me. However, I am unsure as to the image's copyright because I don't know whether or not the painting is copyrighted. I can't tell whether the "1846" on the frame means that the painting was made in 1846 or that the painting was made later but depicts an event in 1846, so I'm bringing it here for discussion. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 22:55, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The no-permission tag was added by the uploader himself, so it's unlikely he was questioning who took the photo. Googling the painting's title reveals that it's only 9 years old, and so still copyrighted [1]. --dave pape (talk) 01:53, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I took and uploaded the photo. Like Drilnoth, I assumed that the painting dated to 1846 and was thus in the public domain when I snapped the photo. I was recently contacted by Mass General's Archives and Special Collections department and informed that the painting itself was still under copyright. That's when I tagged the image as lacking permission.–Cg-realms (talk • contribs) 22:16, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

Ah; thanks for the clarification. I'll readd the tag. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 02:26, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By which I mean that I'll delete it straight away since it was already tagged for long enough.  Done –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 02:29, 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 was: speedily deleted; blatant copyright infringement from http://www.poland.k12.oh.us/indexhigh.htm. Somno (talk) 02:44, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply] 

In-image caption, low res, no meta-data. Possibly taken from another website without permission. J Milburn (talk) 23:10, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. That seems fishy.--A. Gorilla (talk) 23:27, 26 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 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⚡ 18:38, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While listed here at Creative Commons 2.5, the image at Flickr is listed there copyrighted. No indication that uploader was the original license holder. Ricky81682 (talk) 23:33, 26 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 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⚡ 18:38, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While listed here at Creative Commons 2.5, the image at Flickr is listed there copyrighted. No indication that uploader was the original license holder. Ricky81682 (talk) 23:40, 26 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.