Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 July 27

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 G4 by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:11, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

reupload of previously deleted image (File:Malik Ambar.jpg). See Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2009_June_14#File:Copy_of_12062009755.jpg Exit2DOS ^{• Ctrl • Alt • Del} 01:15, 27 July 2009 (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 image 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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:33, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a screenshot or promotional image; in either case, it isn't self made. OR, possibly UE. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 01:16, 27 July 2009 (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 image 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 Protonk (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 08:14, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unless the uploader is the book's publisher, their claim of copyright is false. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 06:00, 27 July 2009 (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 image 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: Kept; now tagged fair use (although marked for deletion for failing the NFCC). Stifle (talk) 11:35, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Self claim - but logo and can't at present find a link between publication and uploader Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:11, 27 July 2009 (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⚡ 00:18, 28 July 2009 (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 image 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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:18, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Self claim- but this look suspicously like a photograph of a sign? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:24, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete it. This photograph was used to get the article University of Bristol up to GA status.If I had admin powers I could delete it myself. Francium12 (talk) 15:32, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment : If you actually wanted a map of the Campus site, I suggest seeing if OpenStreetMap has done

anything in that area. If not why not try and get one of the University Dept. to map the campus for OpenStreetMap (a rendering of which could be then used in Wikipedia) as an exercise. :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:13, 27 July 2009 (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 image 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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:49, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No information - and looks like a staged shot. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:39, 27 July 2009 (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 image 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: Kept; OTRS ticket added. Stifle (talk) 11:37, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright belongs to the original photographer, please prove that uploader is the original photographer Jezhotwells (talk) 16:42, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• There is an email from the uploader to OTRS confirming that he owns the copyright to the image. Mr.Z-man 21:41, 27 July 2009 (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 image 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: Kept; OTRS ticket added. Stifle (talk) 11:37, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No information about the photographer who is the copyright holder - not the son of the subject who is the uploader Jezhotwells (talk) 16:44, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• There is an email from the uploader to OTRS confirming that he owns the copyright to the image. Mr.Z-man 21:41, 27 July 2009 (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 image 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: Kept; OTRS ticket added. Stifle (talk) 11:37, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The copyright holder of this picture is the original phtographers not the son of the subject who simply owns the phtograph that has been scanned. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:47, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• There is an email from the uploader to OTRS confirming that he owns the copyright to the image. Mr.Z-man 21:41, 27 July 2009 (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 image 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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:49, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Sylviepoo says she is the creator of the work and released it into the public domain. I can not say for certain, but I find it doubtful that Sylviepoo created this icon. LadyofShalott 18:55, 27 July 2009 (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 image 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 06:54, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tineye match to non-free site. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:24, 27 July 2009 (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 image 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 06:54, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Source listed is a forum site, there is no indication that the forum poster has rights to the images concerned, let alone any indication of a permission to the uploader here at Wikipedia Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:33, 27 July 2009 (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 image 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 Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:49, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Black and white image of President Ford and the Bangladesh President Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in the white house. There is no evidence to believe that the uploader is the copyright owner. FASTILY ^(TALK) 20:20, 27 July 2009 (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.