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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:05, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

• No information on photographer, date of original publication, or even when the photo was taken. Joseph Lochner, according to my research, was born in the 1860s in Germany, and appears to have died between 1920 and 1930. This image could very well have been taken and published after 1923, and very well could have been copyrighted. Lochner's bakery appears to have been inherited by his son (the 1930 census records indicate that his son, born around 1905, was a baker as well), so it's clear that the bakery existed at after 1923.

The fact that this image is included on a Supreme Court Historical Society webpage is no indication that it is in the public domain.

Regardless, absent author and actual date of publication information, it is too early to presume this is a public domain file. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 14:54, 8 April 2013 (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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 16:06, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Shubhangi atre poorey.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• No evidence that uploader is copyright owner. — Bility (talk) 18:10, 8 April 2013 (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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 16:06, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:N503801378 55439 9678.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Uploader originally claimed to be the author of this image. Three years later, an IP user changed it to credit "Kit Gallagher" [1]. From the filename, this image is obviously downloaded from somewhere (I think this was the Facebook filename format maybe???) so the question is whether we accept that the license is authentic. B (talk) 19:26, 8 April 2013 (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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 16:06, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:N532730606 13706 4740.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Possible copyvio. This user's legitimate uploads are crap taken from bad cell phones. This is a professional quality web-resolution photo with a filename that suggests it was copied from Facebook. The reason I'm nominating it here instead of just speedying it is that works of the government of the state of Florida are public domain, so this image might very well be public domain, albeit for different reasons than claimed here. B (talk) 19:36, 8 April 2013 (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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:06, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:N608785 31159607 5681.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• In-use logo. It is tagged with one of our most abused and nearly always false license tags - ((attribution)). It is possibly PD-ineligible, though in my opinion this passes the threshold of creativity. If it is eligible for copyright, then it could possibly be considered for fair use, though there is another logo for this radio station on the page so I'm not sure we need both. B (talk) 19:47, 8 April 2013 (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 Garion96 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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

• Definitely too complex for ((PD-textlogo)). Stefan2 (talk) 20:53, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Revert to FUR when it was uploaded in 2008 it used a FUR, but in 2011, a different user converted it to PD -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 04:30, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• All of these pass the threshold of originality, but are they public domain for some other reason (like age)? If they are not public domain, I'm not thrilled with using them under a claim of fair use - there's a whole slew of them in the article. --B (talk) 11:57, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, are these logos even legitimate? Google image search doesn't find them used anywhere but here. I tried searching for some of the specific routes and didn't see any of the logos used. They were all taken from an AOL page ... could they just be something that AOL user made up? Delete all unless it can be shown that they are authentic and public domain. (http://web.archive.org/web/20030203120929/http://members.aol.com/hwys/OntHwys/OntHwysOther.html is the AOL page they came from, by the way.) --B (talk) 12:06, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep all - They appear on the Ontario Road Map (more-so on the Tourism and Recreation map). I personally believe these do not meet the threshold for originality, as they are all very basic silhouettes. At the very minimum, however, they are legitimate signs. - Floydian ^τ _¢ 12:13, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Some of the images were moved to Commons and deleted as F8 here. If the conclusion is that these are copyrightable and should be used under a fair use claim on Wikipedia, then the images deleted under F8 need to be undeleted.
• Many of the images were uploaded by 718 Bot (talk · contribs). As far as I can tell, this means that the bot converted GIF files into PNG. Unfortunately, this also means that the name of the original uploader is unknown, so I wasn't able to notify that person. If you can identify the original uploader, feel free to notify that person.
• About fair use, see a recent discussion about scouting articles at Wikipedia:Non-free content review/Archive 20. As you can see, it has been archived twice because people disagreed about the initial closure, and it also caused some discussion at WT:NFCR#Scouting Articles and at various user talk pages (for example User talk:Evrik#NFCR). This seems to be a similar situation and would probably result in a similar quarrel about WP:NFLISTS and WP:NFCC#3a. --Stefan2 (talk) 13:29, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • RingtailedFox (talk · contribs) was the original uploader of all four of these. You can actually see that from the public logs (e.g. [2]) - not just the admin logs. There are a lot of fiefdoms on Wikipedia where people like to protect their non-free content within the fief and don't believe that the rules should apply there. It's unfortunate, but a closing admin needs to discount non-policy reasons for closing a discussion. We need to have better education about our policies - this is an encyclopedia, not a fan site for a particular topic (music, transportation, Scouting, movies, etc). --B (talk) 14:22, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • These items were also under discussion at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2013 February 13#File:FrontierRoute.png, one of our many old unclosed WP:PUF discussions. I am unable to close these old discussions because I was either the original nominator or commented in the discussion. -- Dianna (talk) 14:20, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • If it's agreeable to add File:FrontierRoute.png to this list (that's the only entry I can see not in included in both discussions), I think that would enable the old discussion to be closed, which I could do, as "no agreement reached, relisted here." NtheP (talk) 12:49, 8 May 2013 (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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 16:06, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

• No evidence that this photo has been released into the public domain. We do not assume public domain status. J Milburn (talk) 21:39, 8 April 2013 (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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 16:06, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

• No evidence of public domain status. We do not assume that photographs are PD. J Milburn (talk) 21:44, 8 April 2013 (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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 16:06, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

• No evidence that this image is PD. We do not assume PD status. J Milburn (talk) 21:45, 8 April 2013 (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.