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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:38, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:King Khan3.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Scene from a movie or other production. Eeekster (talk) 00:09, 22 August 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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:38, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:King Khan2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Probably grabbed from the subject's facebook pages. Eeekster (talk) 00:16, 22 August 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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:38, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:King Khan1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Not likely to be the work of the uploader. Eeekster (talk) 00:18, 22 August 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⚡ 01:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Otm1982a.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Crop of the Ohio Department of Transportation's 1982 Ohio state map. The image is copyrighted, making the ((PD-self))-specified license incorrect. Additionally, the permission line of the Information template reads "Fair Use by Ohio Dept of Transportation". However, even if it was tagged for fair use, it doesn't meet WP:NFCC since it could be replaced with a freely licensed image. – TMF 00:20, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete with prejudice. Imzadi 1979 → 07:12, 22 August 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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:38, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:King Khan.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Unlikely to be the work of the uploader. Eeekster (talk) 00:25, 22 August 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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:38, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Unlikely to be the work of the uploader. Eeekster (talk) 00:28, 22 August 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⚡ 01:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sean ardagh.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Claims to be PD, but also claims to be a publicity shot, so it seems unlikely to be PD. I cannot determine the copyright status from the source as it redirects to a Facebook page, where the image does not appear. Reach Out to the Truth 01:00, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, the uploader's account is obviously phoney (i.e., does not belong to the photograph's subject). --THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^PRAISE _{GOOD WORKS} 19:24, 2 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⚡ 01:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:VPSA photo.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• orphaned; includes logo which is not de minimis; cropping logo would be possible, but as orphaned, don't see the point Skier Dude (talk 01:31, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete if not used in an article. --THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^PRAISE _{GOOD WORKS} 19:27, 2 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⚡ 01:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:VUSA1.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

• corporate logo; no source; orphaned Skier Dude (talk 01:32, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Concur. --THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^PRAISE _{GOOD WORKS} 19:28, 2 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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 22:15, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

• corporate logo; no source; if legit, uploader would not be (c) holder Skier Dude (talk 01:48, 22 August 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⚡ 01:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

• The patterns and design of this hat would be copyrighted. —fetch·comms 02:50, 22 August 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⚡ 01:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Since the football image makes up the vast majority of this work and is an interesting part of a video broadcast, it is hard to argue for incidental inclusion. The work is thus a derivative of a copyrighted work, and the licensing is thus false. Even if someone changed the licensing to fair use, it would be replaceable fair use as someone could take a picture with a less interesting part of a football broadcast, such as a pan out to see the field, for example, if de minimus images like File:National Anthem at Super Bowl XLIV.JPG) are not sufficient (they seem to be, however). A very similar problem occurred here and the image was deleted: Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2010_July_13#File:AAMParkscreen.JPG. Jorfer (talk) 05:27, 22 August 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⚡ 01:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:2010NYCosmos.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

• It looks like a logo and it would be copyrighted. So we need a permission from copyright holder. MGA73 (talk) 07:51, 22 August 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⚡ 01:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:All Manipal.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Seems to be a brochure from Kasturba Medical College, Manipa. That would be copyrighted. We need a permission from copyright holder. MGA73 (talk) 07:53, 22 August 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⚡ 01:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Manipal wallpaper.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Seems to be a brochure from Kasturba Medical College, Manipa. Then it would be copyrighted and we need a permission from copyright holder. MGA73 (talk) 07:54, 22 August 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⚡ 01:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:ARK DESIGNS PARTNERS.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• It looks like something taken from the web. MGA73 (talk) 07:58, 22 August 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⚡ 01:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:ARK-DESIGNS-TEAM1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• It looks like something taken from the web. MGA73 (talk) 07:58, 22 August 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⚡ 01:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Al Zahar.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• It looks like something taken from the web. TinEye also found this here: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3469619,00.html where source is given as "Photo: AP" MGA73 (talk) 08:00, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I personally know a man who was also at the spot who took a picture from a similar angle.Tallicfan20 (talk) 14:00, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Then why do you only have a thumbnail without any metadata that is bit for bit the same file as the ynet image? nableezy - 08:14, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Looks like a clearly stolen image. Same size, same perspective. Fletcher (talk) 03:22, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• This is a bit for bit duplicate of the image on ynet credited to AP with both files having an md5sum of 5d24adeae4c37bc3601c743663ec100b and sha1sums of 1e0c0c191e2fd9c3dba3c143edf1f39ccb7d0a40. This is without doubt the exact same file from ynet. nableezy - 08:13, 23 August 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: OTRS Obtained: Ticket #2010082410008753; Non-Admin closure by Soundvisions1 (talk) 02:37, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Barf-0-vision bag.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Whoever created the bag (see Cinema Insomnia) has the copyright. See Commons:Derivative works. MGA73 (talk) 08:03, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• I co-designed the Logo on the bag with the creator of Cinema Insomnia and I have full permission for it's use. DixieDellamorto (talk) 02:06, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• First, in response to a comment on my talk page about "Cinema Insomnia allows it's logos and marketing to be copied for fair use such as articles or other non profit expression". If you release it as PD then everyone can use it for everything - also commercial purposes. So PD is far from fair use. Second, if you wishes to release it as PD I think we need to have a permission send to OTRS. Just to be sure. --MGA73 (talk) 07:39, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• I work on a horror host show, I understand Public Domain. This specific image is royalty free, so it makes no difference whether it's public domain or not. Furthermore, I don't need to ask permission to release something I made with the creator of Cinema Insomnia -- Who is, in fact, sitting right next to me and can't understand why we need to ask YOUR permission to post our work. DixieDellamorto (talk) 20:29, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• If you still have a problem with this, I've been told to ask you to e-mail anyone at cinemainsomnia.com and ask them: info@cinemainsomnia.com or mrlobo@cinemainsomnia.com DixieDellamorto (talk) 21:01, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• The reason is that the identity of the users on Wikipedia are not known so we do not know if you or everyone else on Wikipedia is who they claim to be. Therefore we often ask for a proof of permission when works of commercial kind is uploaded to Wikipedia. Since you know public domain and since you all agree that this photo could be public domain then it should not be a problem to get a permission stored in OTRS. I will send a mail later. Thank you for your time and contribution. --MGA73 (talk) 17:30, 24 August 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⚡ 22:15, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: In looking over this I understand somewhat the issue. The upload method is "easy" for those who are not the creators of the work being uploaded because they just say they did it themselves and that is that - unless it is an obvious copyvio it can sit before anyone notices. It is much harder for those who are the true "authors" as they know what they have and what they are looking for in terms of a license - saddly the wording is so generic in most of the licenses a lot of them do not seem to always convey exactly what is needed and, such as this case, a creator of a promotional items may be at a loss. In this case it seems as though the designer/co-creator of a product uploaded an image of it under the license they saw fit. It appears when MGA73 made their comment's the PD was replaced by the uploader with something that would seem to better match what the image is - an image of a product that has been released by a company or organization to promote their work or product in the media, such as advertising material or a promotional photo in a press kit. But now we have an issue where, based only the tag and nothing that has actually been said here, "bots" and other users who view the image only will say it needs a FUR or it will be deleted. And that, in turn, will lead to somebody saying it it fails NFCC 1 because all somebody has to do it get one of these bags and take a picture of it. My instinct it telling me that an OTRS is the best way to deal with this. So to DixieDellamorto I say to submit one and tag the image with ((otrs pending)). It may take a while but given the discussion so far it would be the best way to clear everything up. Soundvisions1 (talk) 18:11, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• I send a mail some days ago but I just realised that I made a typo in the e-mail adress so I have send the mail again. I expect that it is not a problem to get a permission so I hope we can close this very soon with a permission in OTRS. --MGA73 (talk) 19:15, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Now we have a permission - I added OTRS on the image. --MGA73 (talk) 22:26, 1 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⚡ 01:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

• This is a photo of a work of art. There is no freedom of panorama per Commons:COM:FOP#Philippines. So unless it is PD-old it is not free. MGA73 (talk) 08:06, 22 August 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⚡ 01:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:CBNP Logo.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

• This is a logo and therefore it would be copyrighted. We need a permission from Copyright holder. MGA73 (talk) 08:07, 22 August 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⚡ 01:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Desales saint.0.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• This is a logo and therefore it would be copyrighted and we need a permission from the copyright holder. MGA73 (talk) 08:10, 22 August 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⚡ 01:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Esatap-flashdrive.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• It looks like a professional photo and Tineye gives 3 results (http://www.tineye.com/search/8839383d7c8068a345b54abea9329ae149132ebc/). MGA73 (talk) 08:12, 22 August 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⚡ 01:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Logosau31.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Logos are copyrighted. MGA73 (talk) 08:19, 22 August 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⚡ 01:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lollidrop.GIF (delete | talk | history | logs).

• It is a poster and posters are copyrighted. So unless uploader took the pictures and created the poster in 2003 then it is not free. MGA73 (talk) 08:20, 22 August 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⚡ 01:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Maurice.Harris.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• It looks like a copy from Internet. If not the logo (watermark) is probably not free. MGA73 (talk) 08:25, 22 August 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⚡ 01:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:SMH Wiki FINAL.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Logos are copyrighted so it is not free. MGA73 (talk) 08:27, 22 August 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 as G7 by Nyttend (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:49, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Thermodynamic schools founding twelve .jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• The source is given as http://www.eoht.info/page/Schools+of+thermodynamics but there is no evidence that ALL the photos are Public Domain. I think we need better source for the photos. MGA73 (talk) 09:06, 22 August 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 as G7 by Nyttend (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:49, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Thermodynamic schools founding twelve .png (delete | talk | history | logs).

• The source is given as http://www.eoht.info/page/Schools+of+thermodynamics but there is no evidence that ALL the photos are Public Domain. I think we need better source for the photos. MGA73 (talk) 09:06, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: All of the photos, except the Joseph Henry Keenan photo (which is on public display at the MIT museum), are derivatives of various photos in Wikipedia, e.g. File:Théophile Ernest de Donder.jpg, the photo preceding Keenan. One could, if need be, convert the photo of the table, into an actual Wiki table, using derivatives of pre-existing photos, if so desired. Alternatively, a fair use tag would seem to resolve the issue, if need be. --Libb Thims (talk) 09:27, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• The correct way to make collages is by adding a source for all the images used. Example File:BlackHispanic.jpg. That way it is possible to verify that the images used really is free. --MGA73 (talk) 18:38, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• I understand, however, I cannot commit that much time to the edit. Nearly all of the photos are 19th century, and thus well in public domain. You can superimpose this photo File:GilbertLewis.jpg over Lewis and either obtain overlay a photo needed image over the Keenan photo (or track down the public domain/fair use tags) and that should solve the issue. If you have further concerns, you may (if need be) crop the table down to only the first nine founders. Good luck. --Libb Thims (talk) 01:59, 24 August 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: procedural keep on the grounds that this image is not deletable through this venue; PUF is to examine files licensed under a free license, but have disputed source or licensing information. The file may still be deleted through other means. — ξ^xplicit 00:21, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: This discussion was placed at IFD/PUI using Twinkle, due to concerns by Doc9871 that PUI was not the correct location it has been relocated to Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2010_August_22#File:Jim_In_Miami_w-Hat.jpg. Soundvisions1 (talk) 04:27, 25 August 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⚡ 22:15, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This image's proposed deletion is currently open at the image's talk page. This may be a bot error?[1]: it is tagged with a ((dfu)), a ((Di-replaceable fair use disputed)), a ((Non-free historic image)), and a ((Non-free use rationale)). Cheers... Doc9871 (talk) 04:53, 31 August 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 as G12 by Kinu (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:35, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Uploaded in 2007 by a persistent copyright scofflaw (Conk 9 (talk · contribs) who is now blocked for a month because of failure to follow copyright policy) without reliable image sourcing. User was warned in January 2008 that this image's copyright status was suspicious. Low res. GrapedApe (talk) 16:25, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedily Delete: obvious copyright violation. Original photo is property of the Andy Warhol Museum (see here and here) CrazyPaco (talk) 22:00, 28 August 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⚡ 01:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Uploaded in 2007 by a persistent copyright scofflaw (Conk 9 (talk · contribs) who is now blocked for a month because of failure to follow copyright policy) without reliable image sourcing. User was warned in January 2008 that this image's copyright status was suspicious. Also, this image is really terrible. Low res.GrapedApe (talk) 06:46, 22 August 2010 (UTC) GrapedApe (talk) 16:37, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, photo is unused in Wikipedia and the thumbnail size, poor resolution, and questionable source give little reason for it to be retained.CrazyPaco (talk) 22:03, 28 August 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⚡ 01:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:PVHS entrance.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• sourced to website that has clear (c) notice/claim Skier Dude (talk 23:53, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Image is not from source, image is my own work. Should I remove the source?--Patman21 (talk) 23:04, 30 August 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.