File:Painting of Gen2 Honda Ridgeline.png
[edit]File:360 Digital Sketch of a 2013-2014 Honda Ridgeline RTL.png
[edit]
- 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; deleted as F9 by Nyttend (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 06:05, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- File:360 Digital Sketch of a 2013-2014 Honda Ridgeline RTL.png (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Uploader is claiming these digital drawings as own work, but they are derived from copyrighted images. This image is a composite, and a review of the middle image shows it is derived from this file. Whpq (talk) 06:00, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Deleted as a blatant copyvio. You can't incorporate such an image into a new creation without the new creation being subject to the same copyright-based restrictions as the source. Nyttend (talk) 04:31, 3 February 2016 (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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
File:Honda Ridgeline CAD Drawing.png
[edit]
- 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; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Honda Ridgeline CAD Drawing.png (delete | talk | history | logs).
- After being educated from other wiki admins, such as "Stefan2" and others, I was under the impression that a derivative piece of work was okay to use. Since I used the Honda drawing, which I sighted, as a starting point to redraw a new outline of the vehicle to depict different information about that vehicle that there would be no sort of copyright issue. It's an outline of the vehicle which I redrew to present new info; how can that possibly be a problem? --McChizzle (talk) 15:00, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- It is not an outline of the vehicle. It is a copy of the entire image. -- Whpq (talk) 15:02, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Look again please, there are a lot of differences for I did not like nor need the information that was depicted on the original drawing. I don't understand why it is wrong to use something someone else created as a starting point to produce something new to depict factual information. --McChizzle (talk) 15:08, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Please see Wikipedia:Derivative works -- Whpq (talk) 14:37, 31 January 2016 (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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
File:2009-2014 Honda Ridgeline RTL-EXL-SE-Touring interior.png
[edit]
- 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; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- File:2009-2014 Honda Ridgeline RTL-EXL-SE-Touring interior.png (delete | talk | history | logs).
- I don't know what to say other all three of these images were taken with my smartphone of the interior of my truck which I put into a collage to help with the article on the vehicle. I understand now that the first one I uploaded, which contained my photos and a heavily modified/updated version of a press photo may have been wrong, although not exactly certain why, but these are all of my own photos from my phone of my own vehicle which I am allowed to put in the public domain if I choose. --McChizzle (talk) 15:12, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- You claimed that you took all the photos in the other image collage which turned out to be untrue. So given that, why should the claim that you took all these photos be accepted? I asked you to explain yourself in this message. But instead of responding, you deleted the message with an edit comment that didn't address anything. That is why this file is nominated for deletion. If you indeed took these photos, then yes you are entitled to release them in the public domain. -- Whpq (talk) 21:42, 30 January 2016 (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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
File:Honda Ridgeline Multi-function Center Console.gif
[edit]
- 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; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Honda Ridgeline Multi-function Center Console.gif (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Uploader is claiming own work, but the individual frames used to make the animated GIF appear to be copyrighted images from Honda. See this photo from the Honda site to compare with the animation. Whpq (talk) 06:14, 28 January 2016 (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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
File:NRA Law Enforcement Marksmanship Qualification Badges-Bars.png
[edit]File:Drawing of Honda Ridgeline Frame.svg
[edit]
- 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; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Drawing of Honda Ridgeline Frame.svg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- I clearly stated where the drawing were derived from in the sourcing section. I spend a lot of time recreating and even "free drawing" things to recreate a representation this vehicle unique frame to help with a ongoing dispute about this vehicle's structure. I do not see how this is a copyright violation. Look at the lack of detail in my drawings compared to the original work; it would have taken twice the time I put into making these if I tried to copy very whole and rivet, which I did not do. --McChizzle (talk) 15:20, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Please see Wikipedia:Derivative works -- Whpq (talk) 14:37, 31 January 2016 (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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
File:Honda VTM-4 Torque Control Structure Diagram.svg
[edit]File:Honda Ridgeline tailgate and In-Bed Trunk animation.gif
[edit]
- 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; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Honda Ridgeline tailgate and In-Bed Trunk animation.gif (delete | talk | history | logs).
- 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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- 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; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:05, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Arthur Morris playing career.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- The stated source only says "CRICKET: Arthur Morris" but there is no information about the age, so the assertion that the copyright has expired in Australia can't be verified. The article Arthur Morris uses the image caption "Morris in his cricket whites, c. 1947" but there is no way to verify this statement. There is also no information about the copyright status in the United States. If the unsouced 1947 date is correct, then this is only in the public domain in Australia but not in the United States. Stefan2 (talk) 12:17, 28 January 2016 (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:FFD. AnomieBOT⚡ 13:06, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Confused. I think I just saw this kind of situation (tagged both as free and as nonfree) nominated at FFD the other day. What's the point of bringing this here if we now take such images to FFD? Or if they should still be brought here, what's the point of sending them to FFD? Nyttend (talk) 04:33, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- PUF is for changing free tags into non-free tags while FFD is for changing non-free tags into free tags, I think. I'm disputing the PD tag and think that it should be changed to a non-free tag. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:14, 3 February 2016 (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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.