Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 October 7

< October 6	October 8 >

October 7

File:Marikina Montage 1.JPG

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 ⚡ 07:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Marikina Montage 1.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

No sources for the individual images. Eeekster (talk) 01:50, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I've been able to find three of the images on the commons: File:Dave Deluria.jpg (one of the night scenes), File:Parc Cruz.jpg, File:City Hall of Marikina.jpg (wider than the one in the montage) which are all good but until the rest are found it should be deleted. ww2censor (talk) 03:24, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Without any original sources listed for this derivative work the correct copyright status can not be verified. Soundvisions1 (talk) 12:46, 7 October 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.

File:Daymaker-dvd-cover.jpg

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 Kimchi.sg (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:49, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Daymaker-dvd-cover.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Delete: orphaned image was uploaded as a non-free video cover but the uploader has since changed this to an Creative Commons attribution licence but left the incomplete fair-use rationale giving an owner name different from his own, so, unless there is some proof they are the same person, we must consider it is still non-free and fails WP:NFCC#7. ww2censor (talk) 03:39, 7 October 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.

File:ElvisstampUS29.jpg

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: keep - wrong forum. Try {{dfu}}. Magog the Ogre (talk) 12:12, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:ElvisstampUS29.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Delete: no real fair-use rationale applied to this 1993 stamp that is still copyright as are all post-1977 US postage stamps. There is no critical commentary about the stamp itself that might justify its inclusion under a fair-use claim. The Smithsonian permission mentioned is incompatible with Wikipedia because we don't accept non-commercial purposes, so the licencing prose is false, as is the copyright tag applied and no other acceptable free licence can be added. ww2censor (talk) 04:11, 7 October 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 ⚡ 19:46, 7 October 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.

File:Red Ford F-Series Brush Truck - Chaires-Capitola VFD.jpg

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 ⚡ 07:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Red Ford F-Series Brush Truck - Chaires-Capitola VFD.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Claimed self cc by 3.0 and gfdl, however permission is 'All rights reserved'. Author could possibly be different to uploader. Acather96 (talk) 06:38, 7 October 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.

File:Yasir Qadhi.jpg

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 Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:50, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Yasir Qadhi.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Disputed licensing on talk page, copyright apparently belongs to PeaceTV/IRF. — ξ ^xplicit 07:40, 7 October 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.

File:Emily kim vo.jpg

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 CactusWriter (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 19:46, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Emily kim vo.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Uploader's track record on images is depressing. EXIF data shows software used as QuickTime, suggesting some sort of screencap or the like. Quite unlikely to be the uploader's own work on the face of it. Angus McLellan (Talk) 10:21, 7 October 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.

File:6b0c831d59ce9059.gif

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 ⚡ 07:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:6b0c831d59ce9059.gif (delete | talk | history | logs).

Unused logo or album logo. Uploader only seemed to up this and attempt to create Final Death (band). Soundvisions1 (talk) 10:39, 7 October 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.

File:Msr11.jpg

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 ⚡ 07:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Msr11.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

I can't see any evidence that the photographer is also the author/user. Moreover, the file is unencyclopedic, as it is not used anywhere else. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 10:55, 7 October 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.

File:ARJUN.jpg

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 ⚡ 07:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unencyclopedic file that is not used anywhere, uploaded without evidence of consent from any participants/photographer involved. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 10:57, 7 October 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.

File:NK Sharma.jpg

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 ⚡ 07:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:NK Sharma.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Unencyclopedic file that is not used anywhere, uploaded without evidence of consent from any participants/photographer involved. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 11:00, 7 October 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.

File:Dharamshala2.jpg

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 ⚡ 07:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dharamshala2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Unencyclopedic file that is not used anywhere, uploaded without evidence of consent from any participants/photographer involved. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 11:02, 7 October 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.

File:LHColeFiled.jpg

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 ⚡ 07:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:71 copy.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs)

Orphaned from the deletion of the Killercop.com article in November 2007. Soundvisions1 (talk) 11:16, 7 October 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.

File:Mj63.jpg

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 ⚡ 07:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mj63.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Unused. Taken in 1963 and looks to be a crop of a larger scan. No original source indicated Soundvisions1 (talk) 11:26, 7 October 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.

File:JimmyHaylett.jpg

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 Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:50, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Photographing artwork doesn’t release copyright. Additionally a "Near-duplicate" file was deleted here as a {{puf}}. I don't know how he came to this conclusion, but Angus McLellan stated that the image seems to be posthumous portrait by a local artist. --ARTEST4ECHO ^talk 12:30, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The painting shows the subject with brown eyes, but as he had blue eyes it almost certainly wasn't painted from life. This was mentioned on a local history website which I can't find any more and this diff shows someone leaving the same comment on the image page. The painting seems to be a composite of two photographs, the one with the crew in lifejackets here and a picture of Haylett alone here. Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:41, 8 October 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.

File:10th Toppers 2010.jpg

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 ⚡ 07:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:10th Toppers 2010.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:K.S. Lodha Public School Toppers 2010.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

These are scanned from some newspaper meaning the copyright is owned ether by the paper itself or the photographer himself. I would suspect that these are school photos meaning the studio who came to the school and took them owns the copyright. --ARTEST4ECHO ^talk 12:37, 7 October 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.

File:Pacifiers.jpg

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 ⚡ 07:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused image. Despite use of the {{PD-self}} tag it is doubtful the uploader took this shot. It is a professional product shot most likely lifted from the web. Compare this image to the uploaders only other contribution: File:7yearolddiapers.jpg Soundvisions1 (talk) 12:43, 7 October 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.

File:Brent 1990.jpg

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 ⚡ 07:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Brent 1990.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Image appears to be a school photo or photography studio photograph, meaning the photography studio owns the copyright. Additionally image is only used in userspacees, meaning changing to "fair use" would leave the image "orphaned" and a candidate for deletion. --ARTEST4ECHO ^talk 12:44, 7 October 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.

File:Ken Leishman.jpg

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: keep. File licensed under fair use. — ξ ^xplicit 21:51, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ken Leishman.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Image asys it's from a TV show meaning it's not {{PD-self}}. --ARTEST4ECHO ^talk 12:51, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why a still image of a video is a problem, even if it originally came from a TV show. It should qualify under "fair use". The owner of the original video is not losing anything by someone using one single frame for illustrative purposes. Furthermore, the subject of the photo is deceased, and it is no longer possible to obtain such a photo. If you want me to justify "fair use" for an un-free file I can do so. --Skol fir (talk) 17:17, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done The license has been changed accordingly. Please see File:Ken Leishman.jpg. This file should no longer be eligible for deletion. --Skol fir (talk) 17:48, 7 October 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 ⚡ 19:46, 7 October 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.

File:Lamarr Jail Mugshot.jpg

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 Magog the Ogre (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:50, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lamarr Jail Mugshot.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Booking photos are own by the jurisdiction that took the image. --ARTEST4ECHO ^talk 12:55, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In the state of North Carolina, all gaol mugshots are released to the public domain and can be used for any purpose. Mecklenburg County, is the most populous county in North Carolina, and since it is in the aforementioned state, and I am a resident of the aforementioned county, no exceptions made. User:Yungshawty —Preceding undated comment added 01:16, 8 October 2010 (UTC).[reply]
Not free. Well, yes, there is a {{PD-NCGov}} redirect, but look where the redirect takes you. See also Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 March 23#Template:PD-NCGov. Only Florida and California seem to have provisions to release material into the public domain, as opposed to public access provisions. Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:58, 10 October 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.

File:Rosy Senanayake.jpg

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: keep. Magog the Ogre (talk) 12:20, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rosy Senanayake.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Looks like a screengrab or copy from a website thumbnail; unclear source so no way to verify GFDL claim. (ESkog)^(Talk) 15:17, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the source and sent a request to the Sunday Leader to forward necessary permission under GFDL to OTRS.Cinelover (talk) 04:45, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

replaced by "subst:npd".Cinelover (talk) 04:58, 8 October 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.

File:Rosy Senanayake Ralley.jpg

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: keep. Magog the Ogre (talk) 12:19, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rosy Senanayake Ralley.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Low resolution image; source/licensing information seems questionable at best. (ESkog)^(Talk) 15:18, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the source and sent a request to the Sunday Leader to forward necessary permission under GFDL to OTRS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cinelover (talk • contribs) 04:45, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

replaced by "subst:npd".Cinelover (talk) 05:01, 8 October 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.

File:Rosy Senanayake Charity.jpg

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 ⚡ 07:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rosy Senanayake Charity.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Unclear source; no way to verify GFDL claim. (ESkog)^(Talk) 15:18, 7 October 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.

File:Rosy Senanayake Charity1.jpg

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: keep. Magog the Ogre (talk) 12:21, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rosy Senanayake Charity1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Unclear source; no way to verify GFDL claim. (ESkog)^(Talk) 15:19, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the source and sent a request to Mrs. Rosy Senanayake to forward necessary permission under GFDL to OTRS.Cinelover (talk) 04:47, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

replaced by "subst:npd".Cinelover (talk) 05:02, 8 October 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.

File:Doug Hattaway.jpg

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 ⚡ 07:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Doug Hattaway.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Appears to be a professional photograph. Source site does not contain this image, nor does it contain a release to PD. (ESkog)^(Talk) 15:21, 7 October 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.

File:E-Sword 9 7 1 screenshot.png

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: marked fair use. Magog the Ogre (talk) 12:27, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:E-Sword 9 7 1 screenshot.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

Screenshot of probably copyrighted software, doubt uploader is copyright holder. Acather96 (talk) 16:00, 7 October 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.

File:Caroline1.jpg

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 ⚡ 08:32, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Caroline1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Likely copyvio. User has also spammed Stealing Angels with copyvio content. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 17:05, 7 October 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.

File:Caroline b and w.jpg

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 ⚡ 07:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Caroline b and w.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Likely copyvio. User has also spammed Stealing Angels with copyvio content. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 17:06, 7 October 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.

File:TAYLA LYNN1.jpg

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 ⚡ 07:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:TAYLA LYNN1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Possible copyvio; user has added a ton of copyvio content. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 17:07, 7 October 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.

File:Stealing Angels 2.jpg

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 ⚡ 07:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Stealing Angels 2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Possible copyvio; user has added a ton of copyvio content. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 17:08, 7 October 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.

File:Stealing Angels 3.jpg

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 ⚡ 07:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Stealing Angels 3.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Possible copyvio; user has added a ton of copyvio content. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 17:08, 7 October 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.

File:Caroline1.jpg

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 ⚡ 07:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Caroline1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Possible copyvio; user has added a ton of copyvio content. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 17:08, 7 October 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.

File:RandyRhoads.jpg

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) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

No evidence of permission or that the uploader is the copyright holder. It lacks location, date or any information whatsoever about when it was taken. The image is available in various higher resolutions all over the Internet. Nymf _hideliho! 18:12, 7 October 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.

File:Mcdougall Centre.jpg

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 ⚡ 07:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mcdougall Centre.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

No indication at http://travel.webshots.com/photo/2593187740101453251mIaRsZ that it has been released into the public domain or that it is the work of the uploader MilborneOne (talk) 18:39, 7 October 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.

File:BA-Logo.gif

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 ⚡ 08:32, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:BA-Logo.gif (delete | talk | history | logs).

Tagged as PD-textlogo, though I don't really think that applies. Description is:

"Provided by blue-alliance for use in wikipedia*, which would also be a problem if the PD tag is not valid. Acather96 (talk) 18:56, 7 October 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.

File:Banff centre.jpg

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 ⚡ 08:32, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Banff centre.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Image appears on http://www.loginstitute.ca/Newsletter.html does not appear to be the work of the uploader MilborneOne (talk) 18:58, 7 October 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.

File:Hric.jpg

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 ⚡ 08:32, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

No indication at http://www.ucalgary.ca/sacri/node/97 that the work is in the public domain or the work of the uploader MilborneOne (talk) 19:03, 7 October 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.

October 7

zproxy.org