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 Nv8200p (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can find no evidence that the GNU license applies. The website mentioned in the summary has a copyright notice on it. Polly (Parrot) 00:24, 26 February 2008 (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 Nv8200p (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can find no evidence that the GNU license applies. The website mentioned in the summary has a copyright notice on it. Polly (Parrot) 00:25, 26 February 2008 (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 Nv8200p (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's copied from a website (here) and licensed under "GFDL presumed", but I can't see anything at the website which would give one reason to believe it operates under the GFDL. — Sturm 12:28, 26 February 2008 (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 Nv8200p (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comes from the BBC website so very unlikely be under a GNU license. Polly (Parrot) 14:52, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

this image come from BBC, that´s the link , so?? what´s the problem??, the image is from the chilean UN troops and the flag is in there.. lol...

hey guys?? dont you see that or what? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cruzyel (talk • contribs) 14:55, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• The problem is the copyright is likely to be the BBC's and not free to be used without permission. Polly (Parrot) 15:58, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

and what i have to do to put the picture in wikipedia??.

please help i dunno know.

thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cruzyel (talk • contribs) 17:17, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• You'd have to come up with a credible Fairuse rationale, which for that image won't be easy. Polly (Parrot) 23:20, 26 February 2008 (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: Keep; file is tagged as non-free.-FASTILY ^(TALK) 23:05, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very dubious that the uploader is the copyright holder, the website in the summary is copyrighted. Polly (Parrot) 15:56, 26 February 2008 (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. AnomieBOT⚡ 18:35, 25 February 2012 (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 Nv8200p (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Scanned copy of a copyrighted logo does not fit with a PD-self template. Polly (Parrot) 18:48, 26 February 2008 (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 Nv8200p (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence that the uploader holds copyright. — PC78 (talk) 19:03, 26 February 2008 (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 Nv8200p (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence that the uploader holds copyright. — PC78 (talk) 19:07, 26 February 2008 (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: Keep; for now-FASTILY ^(TALK) 23:08, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Image:Stingrs.jpg
• Image:Sgrs.jpg
• Image:Rshf.jpg
• Image:Tomcruise robs.jpg
• Image:SeanC RS.jpg
• Image:Vnb.jpg
• Image:Storyitc2.jpg
• Image:TBALL6.jpg
• Image:Hellraisers rs.jpg

A selection of book covers which the uploader claims to hold copyright to, but which very much appear to have been lifted off amazon and ebay. Only being used to illustrate a bibliography, which in itself fails fair use guidelines. PC78 (talk) 19:19, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• The uploader claimed on my talk page that he has permission from the publisher and author to use these images (see diff). I've asked him on his talk page to contact OTRS to confirm permission; if no confirmation that these images are usable under a free license is forthcoming, I agree with deleting them unless standard source information, licensing tags and non-free use rationales are added to their description pages. --Muchness (talk) 19:43, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In response to the previous comment about whether these images infringe on any copyright laws regarding Wikipedia, I can assue that I have full permission to use them from the author, who in turn has full permission from his publishers in regards to the books images. If you would like to see a personal email messaged to myself from the author confirming this, I will quite happily forward you this. If there is any further objections, I can give you the personal email of the author to aquire consent yourselves. I have already received a confirmation from OTRS stating that this was acceptable. I thought this issue had been cleared up? Any further problems please dont hesitate to contact me. SeanyakaRalphy (talk) 21:10, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Doesn't copyright to the book covers lie solely with the publishers? Is the author at liberty to grant permission for their use on Wikipedia? If not, I would think that you'll need written consent from each of the publishers to use these images. At present there is very litle information given for these image uploads; that is why they have been tagged and listed here. PC78 (talk) 01:47, 3 March 2008 (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 Nv8200p (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No proof that uploader is copyright holder. Clearly a promotional image. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 22:11, 26 February 2008 (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 I9 by CambridgeBayWeather (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a publicity shot, unlikely to be a Creative Commons photo. Uploader has a history of adding copyrighted images. Polly (Parrot) 23:15, 26 February 2008 (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 Nv8200p (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence that the GNU license is applicable, the website in the Summary does not work. Most likely this is a copyrighted image from a commercial website. Polly (Parrot) 23:29, 26 February 2008 (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.