This is the current revision of this page, as edited by WOSlinkerBot (talk | contribs) at 12:55, 17 February 2024 (add missing italics in discussion close to reduce lint errors). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.
Revision as of 12:55, 17 February 2024 by WOSlinkerBot (talk | contribs) (add missing italics in discussion close to reduce lint errors)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)| < November 13 | November 15 > |
|---|
November 14
File:Amchstigerband.jpg
- 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 John (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:57, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- File:Amchstigerband.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Its a logo and stolen from the Facebook page that the same editor continues trying to spam on Misplaced Pages -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 00:36, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- 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:HearnsTommyonmywall.jpg
- 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 Infrogmation (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 13:30, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- File:HearnsTommyonmywall.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Photograph of a photograph. Copyright belongs to the publisher of the original photograph. Mosmof (talk) 03:54, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- Deleted, clear copyright violation derivative. -- Infrogmation (talk) 12:23, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- 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:ParkSiYoun2009.jpg
- 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⚡ 02:44, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
- File:ParkSiYoun2009.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- How does this image have an OTRS ticket even though there's no sign that the Foundation actually looked at the image? Mosmof (talk) 04:39, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- This photo has the same thing does it mean that this image have an OTRS ticket even though there's no sign that the Foundation actually looked at the image?
- Of course not. It's clear the Foundation reviewed the permission and issued an OTRS ticket. --Mosmof (talk) 02:40, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
- This photo has the same thing does it mean that this image have an OTRS ticket even though there's no sign that the Foundation actually looked at the image?
- Delete. Looks very much like it's been taken from , had the watermark cropped off, and resized. I don't know vigorously thes things are checked by OTRS, but this doesn't look legit to me. Uploader is indef blocked for abusing multiple accounts, and I certainly wouldn't take their word for it. PC78 (talk) 01:06, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
- 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:2008 Mirus.jpg
- 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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:45, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
- File:2008 Mirus.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Yearbook cover, don't have a clue who would be the (c) holder - school?, publisher? - but PD-self is not appropriate/correct. Skier Dude (talk) 05:36, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- 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:3withbah.jpg
- 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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:45, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
- File:3withbah.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- cartoon characters from Booples - unlikely uploader is (c) holder Skier Dude (talk) 06:09, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- 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:BookofClare.jpg
- 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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:45, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
- File:BookofClare.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Book cover; unlikely uploader is (c) holder Skier Dude (talk) 06:23, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- 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:Chekhov monument Sakhalin.jpg
- 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.
Attribution licensing confirmed. Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:10, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
- Not being able to read Russian, I can't determine the copyright status from the source. It seems unlikely that the {{attribution}} tag is all that is required. Powers 16:16, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- The page is reasonably clear. The actual Russian says that "if you partially or fully use the material active attributation of museum.ru is required". The next line says write to us at blah blah blah but this isn't necessarily a requirement for attributable as it is part of a cluster of comments. I would say that the image is being correctly used and does not infringe the terms of use of the copyright holder. Spartaz 07:44, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- The only part I could read was the part that said "Copyright (c) 1996-2009" so that's why I was concerned. Powers 13:16, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- Understandable, I had to ask a much better Russian speaker then I am to check the meaning of the sentance. Spartaz 14:02, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- The only part I could read was the part that said "Copyright (c) 1996-2009" so that's why I was concerned. Powers 13:16, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- The page is reasonably clear. The actual Russian says that "if you partially or fully use the material active attributation of museum.ru is required". The next line says write to us at blah blah blah but this isn't necessarily a requirement for attributable as it is part of a cluster of comments. I would say that the image is being correctly used and does not infringe the terms of use of the copyright holder. Spartaz 07:44, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- 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:Volcano stadium.png
- 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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons, please nominate it for deletion there if you feel it is non-free. AnomieBOT⚡ 18:33, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- File:Volcano stadium.png (delete | talk | history | logs).
- The image looks to high quality to be self made. GoPurple'nGold24 18:24, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- 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:Den lille havfru.jpg
- 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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:45, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
- File:Den lille havfru.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- The Little Mermaid is still under copyright, and the heirs are actively pursuing royalties from any media using images of the statue. Images are routinely deleted on commons , as 'Freedom of Panorma' only extends to buildings in Denmark. User:Sertmann) 20:28, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- 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:El Aurassi Hotel Algiers-page001.svg
- 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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:45, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
- It's unlikely that Imad007 (talk · contribs) created this image and owns the copyright. Theleftorium 21:24, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- 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.