Speedy was declined because I didn't provide the URL the image was copied from, but it looks clear-cut to me - no image data, small resolution, probably from a Hershey's advertisement. The uploader has been blocked for uploading copyrighted images, after making a number of other disruptive edits. — Somno (talk) 04:45, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commons shining through. Garion96 (talk) 19:10, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promotional image with vaguely- and informally-stated claim of free licence Scheinwerfermann (talk) 05:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned album cover, very unlikely uploader is copyright holder. Skier Dude (talk) 07:45, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Derivative of an image here. — neuro^(talk) 11:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image is very clearly a photograph of a TV screen, uploader does not own this image. Mosmof (talk) 16:50, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Indeed. Next time I must remember to steady my television set whilst I sit on my armchair on those long, lonely winter nights waiting for referees and people from the radio to appear before me ad nauseum... --➨Candlewicke  ^{:) Sign/Talk} 20:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image is very clearly a photograph of a TV screen, uploader does not own this image. Mosmof (talk) 16:51, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Not entirely sure that's her either... I think I uploaded the wrong photo there... verdict... DELETE! --➨Candlewicke  ^{:) Sign/Talk} 20:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image is a photograph of a TV screen, uploader does not own this image. Mosmof (talk) 16:51, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Well it does say he was on a TV show... but is "screen" the correct word? --➨Candlewicke  ^{:) Sign/Talk} 20:29, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image is a photograph of a TV screen, uploader does not own this image. Mosmof (talk) 16:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Based on image quality, most likely a screen capture/photograph of TV screen. Mosmof (talk) 17:18, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Uploading editor is a well-respected and prolific contributor with no history of copyright violations. It doesn't look like a screen capture/photograph of TV screen and I think the summary is entirely reasonable. I see no reason to not assume good faith here. IronGargoyle (talk) 20:18, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. Can't recall ever seeing her on TV if I'm totally honest. If she is a TV regular, I'd nearly be certain she tends to be on the radio more often. Also, in relation to image quality, if I were capturing images off a TV screen I would take a little more care to ensure they weren't as blurry and of significantly higher quality hence the current state of some of my image uploads... ;) --➨Candlewicke  ^{:) Sign/Talk} 20:25, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would have thought a phone image but there you go... --➨Candlewicke  ^{:) Sign/Talk} 20:44, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • By the way, for the record, when I previously commented on this page I was being slightly oversarcastic and apologise for any undue offence caused. --➨Candlewicke  ^{:) Sign/Talk} 02:34, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kept - Garion96 (talk) 19:11, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comic book cover. I doubt the uploader owns the rights to this image. J Milburn (talk) 18:59, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Oh. Gosh. One that isn't mine. Cough! Have we verified that the owner is not a comic book artist? --➨Candlewicke  ^{:) Sign/Talk} 20:41, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Please see Veritas 012.jpg PUI discussion where I brought up the same question ("Have we verified that the owner is not a comic book artist?") and suggested the ((di-no permission)) tag be placed on this image. The image has been tagged ((PUI)) and brought here, so the answer to the question would be "No." Soundvisions1 (talk) 14:39, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suspicious, low resolution image. Appears to be posed, I doubt the uploader owns the rights. I contacted the user regarding this and other images, but they have not replied. J Milburn (talk) 22:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suspicious, low resolution image. Appears to be posed, I doubt the uploader owns the rights. I contacted the user regarding this and other images, but they have not replied. J Milburn (talk) 22:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suspicious, low resolution image. Appears to be posed, I doubt the uploader owns the rights. I contacted the user regarding this and other images, but they have not replied. J Milburn (talk) 22:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suspicious, low resolution image. Appears to be posed, I doubt the uploader owns the rights. I contacted the user regarding this and other images, but they have not replied. J Milburn (talk) 22:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suspicious image. Appears to be posed, I doubt the uploader owns the rights. I contacted the user regarding this and other images, but they have not replied. J Milburn (talk) 22:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suspicious image. Appears to be posed, I doubt the uploader owns the rights. I contacted the user regarding this and other images, but they have not replied. J Milburn (talk) 22:18, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]