Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 July 15

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⚡ 04:43, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Somehow I doubt this has been released into the public domain by its copyright holder. J Milburn (talk) 00:11, 15 July 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.

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: procedural keep, as the file is no longer under a free license. Will likely be deleted for lacking a fair use rationale, though. — ξ^xplicit 01:26, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:MickeyMouseJapan.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

• I think that this would be a great fair use picture, but this seems to be a derivative work of Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck, which would make the current licensing false. Even though the photo is Japanese, the Wikipedia servers are in Florida, so even if Japan was not part of international copyright agreements it does not change the legality of use here. Disney characters are a big enough component here to be considered a derivative work of Disney's copyright; see Commons:Commons:Derivative works. Jorfer (talk) 04:51, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Someone has changed the licensing to fair use, but the higher resolution photo still needs to be deleted per Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria.--Jorfer (talk) 21:04, 25 July 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⚡ 04:43, 28 July 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.

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: Erroneous Nomination. When following the listing instructions (step 2), you need to replace "Image_name.ext" with the actual name of the file. You'll also want to put your reason for deletion just after "reason=". Feel free to just replace this entire section with the corrected template. If you are still having trouble, ask for help at WT:PUF or at my talk page. AnomieBOT⚡ 09:11, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:File name.ext (delete | talk | history | logs).

• reason Shreysoni31 (talk) 08:23, 15 July 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.

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⚡ 02:54, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:AncientNothing.jpeg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Album covers. I doubt this is freely licensed. J Milburn (talk) 12:11, 15 July 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.

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⚡ 02:54, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dogs Are Better Than Cats.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Album cover. I doubt this is freely licensed. J Milburn (talk) 12:13, 15 July 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.

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. None of the sources explicitly implied that the image was released under CC-BY-SA-3.0, or any free license for that matter. — ξ^xplicit 01:25, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ruslan Chick.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• No evidence of permission. Source is not viewable. Eeekster (talk) 20:33, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Facebook photos are generally not viewable unless you log in (I don't think you even have to be friends with the picture owner, unless that's the way they set up their security settings). I have e-mailed Ruslan, requesting him to e-mail OTRS. I would also like some cooperation from Eeekster in order to resolve the situation; so far, my attempt to communicate remains unanswered. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 20:49, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Ruslan has just pointed me to the original location of this photo on Chick Corea's website. How do we go from there? Hearfourmewesique (talk) 23:32, 15 July 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.