Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 May 25

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: Retagged {{npd}}. – Quadell ^(talk) 02:34, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Originally from a screenshot of a website, as the original file shows, and so I doubt the GFDL-self claim. J Milburn (talk) 09:15, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Furthermore, you can see a copyright stamp on the screen shot. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:18, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I own the image.. so i have given it on GFDL.. copyright is for the whole sight not for this image.. [[User:imdabs|Amit Амит अमित ਅਮਿਤ]] ([[User talk:imdabs|talk]]) (talk) 11:08, 31 May 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:17, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader provided no source/authorship/license information. Everything has been added gradually by guesswork since. Papa November (talk) 09:40, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The {{PD-self}} tag was added by an anonymous IP that made no other edits. It could have been the uploader. Who knows? – Quadell ^(talk) 02:35, 12 June 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 Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:17, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A part of this image is Ho Chi Minh portrait, which is not free, nor in public domain. Vinhtantran (talk) 10:59, 25 May 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: Not deleted. – Quadell ^(talk) 02:37, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If the uploader don't indicate the exact url of website, how can we know that it really is published in 1884 (to use PD-US)? Who is the author? And he died over 100 years ago (to use PD-old)? Vinhtantran (talk) 16:06, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly an example of an Épinal print and thereby published. These were produced in France in the 19th century. There is no question that this is in the public domain per {{PD-US-1923-abroad}}. IronGargoyle (talk) 22:28, 25 May 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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons, please nominate it for deletion there if you feel it is non-free. AnomieBOT⚡ 16:54, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Source is claimed to be that of uploader, however image is a Getty Image, as seen at: http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/2712710/Getty-Images-Sport LifeIsPain (talk) 16:33, 25 May 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: Not deleted, but tagged {{nrd}}. – Quadell ^(talk) 02:40, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Highly doubtful that the uploader owns the copyright to the ad/flyer. Mosmof (talk) 19:06, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't own the copyright. Sorry about the confusion. However, the player has been defunct since 1989 and the image should be fair use. Thanks. OddibeKerfeld (talk)

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 Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:17, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The user claims that to have created this image in January 2009, but it is clearly from a press event in 2008. Unclear how the uploader has the rights to this image. Mosmof (talk) 20:25, 25 May 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.