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 TexasAndroid (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

reason this image is non-free -- ReyBrujo 01:58, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: disclaimer at source website states "Copyright (C) 107 Oricon Inc. All Rights Reserved." ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 06:43, 30 July 2007 (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 as I7 by Maxim (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No indication this image is public domain. Merely presumed, which is likely not the case since it is from a political campaign. — Tom (talk - email) 02:02, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a US Government image, that would mean this is a PD image. If this image was taken by a journalist, it should be fair use. Does anyone know what the original source is? Obviously since Reagan is dead, this image is not replaceble, so we should be able to claim it under fair us in any case. Dr. Paul has been attacked from the conservative base for not being a real conservative, and this image of him together with Reagan adds a lot to the article to dispel that myth. Still, finding out who the original photographer was is important in this case, even if the image can be used under fair use. JACOPLANE • 2007-08-6 01:14

The image appears in Ron Paul promotional material (pdf), with the statement that it is property of the Ron Paul 2008 campaign and may be freely redistributed. I'm guessing that someone with Paul took the picture. Perhaps the campaign can be contacted. It seems to me that the copyright lies with the Paul campaign and the picture constitutes fair use for Wikipedia to use. The image should not be deleted.--Gloriamarie 02:27, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Public Domain - Journalists aren't allowed to take photographs aboard Air Force One, but the presidential detail provides a photographer for just these sorts of pictures. It has to be PD-USAF, and I have replaced the tag as such. ←Ben^B4 13:44, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I may be wrong about not being allowed, but I remember reading ... something. ←Ben^B4 20:11, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Closed as not unfree after way more than 14 days. ←Ben^B4 06:08, 29 August 2007 (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 Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted to Iran Daily at http://www.iran-daily.com/1383/2159/html/index.htm (direct link to image: http://www.iran-daily.com/1383/2159/html/010881.jpg) — Rebelguys2 ^talk 03:35, 30 July 2007 (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 Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted to Joe Klamar, Agence France per http://en.rian.ru/photolents/20060613/49411737_5.html (direct link to image: http://img.rian.ru/images/4925/97/49259796.jpg) — Rebelguys2 ^talk 03:37, 30 July 2007 (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 Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted to Pierre-Philippe Marcou, Agence France per http://en.rian.ru/photolents/20060613/49411737_6.html (direct link to image: http://img.rian.ru/images/4926/09/49260986.jpg) — Rebelguys2 ^talk 03:41, 30 July 2007 (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 as I8 by ^demon (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 01:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like an AP photo, found with an Associated Press article reprinted at http://egyptelection.com/content/view/480/45/ — Rebelguys2 ^talk 03:48, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader routinely claims news photos to be his own. Calliopejen1 19:19, 28 August 2007 (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 Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Licensing situation unlikely to be correct, given uploader's other possibly unfree images above. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 04:08, 30 July 2007 (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 Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Licensing situation unlikely to be correct, given uploader's other possibly unfree images above. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 04:08, 30 July 2007 (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 Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Licensing situation unlikely to be correct, given uploader's other possibly unfree images above. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 04:08, 30 July 2007 (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 Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Licensing situation unlikely to be correct, given uploader's other possibly unfree images above. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 04:09, 30 July 2007 (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 Can't sleep, clown will eat me (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if there is a specific policy on this, but the url in top-right corner makes this photo somewhat unencyclopedic. Also, I dispute the origin of the picture regarding copyright. Kl4m 05:51, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Watermarks are not permitted per WP:IUP#User-created_images. -- But|seriously|folks  08:16, 30 July 2007 (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 as I8 by Maxim (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 01:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No clear source, possible copyright infringement. Uploader has history of uploading replaceable fair use images. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 06:41, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I took this photo at a WWE SmackDown! live event in New York in 2006. --Maestro25 03:35, 13 August 2007 (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 ST47 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural listing. Added manually to WP:SCV with the statement: "No tags, image looks like been taken by a pro." And so it does, but that does not mean it is a copyvio.  But|seriously|folks  08:13, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added it since it looks like a picture downloaded from Google. My experience is that 'good' photographers are very keen of having all information in the image description. This certainly doesn't have that. To take this image you probably need a 400/f2.8, I doubt many people with expensive equipment like that upload images to wikipedia. I photograph hockey my self, and my knowledge tells me that this is a case of copyright violation. --Krm500 22:29, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was right. Picture taken on March 4, 2007, during a game between the Minnesota Wild and the Vancouver Canucks. Photographer Jeff Vinnick, Getty Images. Getty Editorial #73491119. This is unacceptable. --Krm500 22:46, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I see the image here at Getty. I have left a note at the uploader's talk page inquiring whether he has permission from the copyright holder, as he seems to have obtained releases for other images. -- But|seriously|folks  17:23, 31 July 2007 (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 Garion96 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image has been making round on Thai internet forums. Uploader has uploaded disputed images in the past and a suspected sockpuppet.Suredeath 10:17, 30 July 2007 (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 as I1 by Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly doubt the validity of the GDFL claim, considering the image is 78 years at the very least, judging by the description. Whether is is licensable as ((Pd-old)) I don't know, not knowing the proper soource. Viridae^Talk 10:35, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize. The picture was taken by an ancestor of mine, so I thought it was okay for me to release it. Nonetheless, it is a moot point. This is a picture of Williams Resort which only existed for 2 years prior to the founding of Red Arrow Camp in 1920. Therefore, the picture must be older than 1923 and therefore fall into the PD. Tlautz 01:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to PD-US -Nv8200p talk 00:14, 10 September 2007 (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 Can't sleep, clown will eat me (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged GFDL, permission from Flickr uploader is asserted but not documented, Flickr page states all rights reserved.  But|seriously|folks  16:43, 30 July 2007 (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 Calliopejen1 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged GFDL but note watermark.  But|seriously|folks  18:00, 30 July 2007 (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 Quadell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

pending result of Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images/2007 July 7#Image:Jeff.stryker.hisxpress.jpg __meco 19:06, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Kept - that result was keep. The Evil Spartan 04:51, 16 September 2007 (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 as F8 by Angusmclellan (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 01:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Permission given at [1] appears to be for Wikipedia use only. The copyright holder needs to be contacted again following the guidelines at WP:COPYREQ. Essentially, we need an e-mail from the copyright holder sent to permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org with a statement such as "I authorize the redistribution of LeekInAction.jpg under the terms of the CC-BY-SA-2.5." —Remember the dot ^(talk) 21:17, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked the owner of the photograph to send me confirmation which I will forward to OTRS. I wasn't fully aware of the procedure and can only apologise......... ChrisTheDude 23:22, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Permission has now been received from the copyright holder and sent to OTRS ChrisTheDude 16:14, 31 July 2007 (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.