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⚡ 02:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Appears to be a screen capture. Eeekster (talk) 04:40, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Only the most recent version of this file is a screen capture. The original version, as of 22:09, June 3, 2009, had no apparent copyright problems. Reverting to that version of the file, and deleting the present version seems to me to be the optimal solution. NiciVampireHeart 15:13, 14 December 2011 (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⚡ 02:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

• No evidence uploader is copyright holder. Kelly ^hi! 05:29, 6 December 2011 (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 F8 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 02:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Extendedvalidation.PNG (delete | talk | history | logs).

• I feel that this is a non-free image. Not so sure. But it is not definitely ((PD-self)) Sreejith K (talk) 11:09, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  Man, I uploaded that when I was a WP:NOOB. Licence fixed. I disputed (and still dispute) whether the fact I used PayPal's EV was wrong. What do you all think? Matthew Thompson ^{talk to me bro!} 11:13, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  This also uses PayPal. Matthew Thompson ^{talk to me bro!} 11:18, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  LOL. 1, 2, 3, 4.Matthew Thompson ^{talk to me bro!} 11:22, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's nice to know. Thanks for fixing the license. I have moved the image to Commons and the image here can now be deleted.--Sreejith K (talk) 11:39, 6 December 2011 (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⚡ 02:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Flag of the Ulster Defence Association.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Non-free flag. The image was once deleted from Commons. See: http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Uda_flag.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1 Sreejith K (talk) 12:29, 6 December 2011 (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.-FASTILY ^(TALK) 00:57, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

• Evaluating this contributor's uploads following on a note at the copyright problems board, I immediately found evidence of fraudulent claim of "own work". He uploaded File:Gvkmall.jpg and, when challenged for source information, added that the photograph was taken on 18 September 2011. Since the image was published here under full copyright on January 2011, that's patently wrong. (Admins should review the file and metadata for other clues, but for beans reasons, I will not mention them here.) I pretty quickly found four other images claimed as own work that had been previously published under copyright by others. These are the only two images that do not qualify for F9, and I suspect that neither are the work of the uploader. I found other versions of the first here, but I cannot verify the date on any of them. Nevertheless, without some strong evidence that in these occasions he is telling the truth, I think we must delete them. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:00, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I fully share Moonriddengirl's concerns. In addition, one of the files is a version of a picture which was published in various versions in 2010, here, for example, well before the Wikipedia upload of 28 October 2011‎. Of course, that does not prove that the Wikipedia uploader was not the person who had published it originally, but the overall balance of evidence is strong enough that we really cannot give teh benefit of the doubt. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:32, 6 December 2011 (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⚡ 02:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Capture3.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

• The file was uploaded by a user (since blocked as a sockpuppet) who claimed that the image was their own work. However, the file looks as though it may be taken from a television picture or something similar, and the user had previously uploaded other files which were deleted because of licensing problems. I am led to doubt whether the claim of copyright on this file is valid, and since the file is not used in any article and the uploader is indefinitely blocked, I can see no purpose in keeping it. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:23, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Looks a lot like a screenshot and the name seems to confirm that. De728631 (talk) 20:24, 9 December 2011 (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⚡ 02:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

• "taken from a photograph" - Which photograph..??, Who is the author..??, When it was first published..??, Is it released under free license ...Captain......Tälk tö me... 17:59, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Unclear source and original authorship. De728631 (talk) 20:22, 9 December 2011 (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⚡ 02:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Seems to be a work closely derived from a presumably copyrighted work, the Magic Knight video game series. The uploader claims that it is derived from screen grabs. 137.43.188.78 (talk) 18:29, 6 December 2011 (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⚡ 02:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

• I was looking for English Wikipedia files with EXIF rotation set (since they typically need to be rotated in order to look correct) and found this. The source seems to be [1] which allows non-commercial use only: "Copyright remains at all times with Thomas & Keith Sisman. Pictures on our websites, Wikipedia and Panoramio (Google Earth) may be copied and used for non-profit use (not to be sold). We are happy to see the pictures used in editorial and displays etc. When pictures are to be sold (as in book or other form), you must seek permission first." Stefan2 (talk) 23:50, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Wrong license unless we get a confirmation via OTRS. De728631 (talk) 20:21, 9 December 2011 (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⚡ 02:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Boxworth village sign.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• What's the date of the coat of arms? Is it copyrighted? Stefan2 (talk) 23:58, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• That does not seem to be a work of artistic craftsmanship which enjoys freedom of panorama in the UK. Rather it looks like a graphic work which would be copyrighted. De728631 (talk) 20:18, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• It's a building (namely a village sign) in a public place (namely Boxworth village green); isn't that enough? Fivemack (talk) 17:02, 12 December 2011 (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.