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 NrDg (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image is not available at stated source. The uploader may not have the right to release the image under GFDL. bluemask ^(talk) 12:57, 21 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 as I9 by NrDg (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence that igma.tv released this image under GFDL. bluemask ^(talk) 13:01, 21 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⚡ 15:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The uploader claims that permission was forwarded to the permissions OTRS, but it was never tagged. I had someone with OTRS access check, and there's no record of it. I e-mailed the uploader on 27 February and have gotten no response. WODUP 03:13, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about this, I've been away from Wiki for a bit. I indeed did forward the copies of e-mails between myself and Ms. Garten to the OTRS e-mail address -- apologies if the e-mails didn't arrive for some reason. I don't have them anymore since it's been quite some time since she supplied the picture to me (with permission from both herself and the photographer who took it), so what can we do? I really don't want to see this deleted as she went to the trouble of helping me with the picture and she's not someone very fond of public interaction to begin with. Thanks for the notification, I appreciate it. Air.dance (talk) 04:07, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A month later and I'm still waiting for resolution on this. I'll give it another week or so for someone to weigh in, then I'll consider the matter resolved and remove the deletion tag from the image. Thanks. Air.dance (talk) 11:16, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image deleted. Without permission to release image under a free license, image cannot stay. -Nv8200p talk 14:55, 26 April 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

courtesy listing - image was tagged for speedy as "looks like non-free image" which is true, but not itself grounds for deletion - uploader claims to be the creator, which is questionable, further investigation may be warranted Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 04:33, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The image looks like a screen capture from a fashion show. Check the opening scene from this video: http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.channel&ChannelID=308703166 -- Whpq (talk) 21:46, 13 April 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 I4 by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

see image description page history for a G12 tag with rationale but link provided couldn't be parsed - needs investigation Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 05:05, 22 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 as I4 by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

states permission given, but not OTRS ticket. States attribution required, but public domain license tag used. Please see WP:COPYREQ on how to ask for permission and what to do with the email once it is received. MECU≈talk 13:46, 22 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) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 15:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"image from personal collection" is vague, does the uplaoder really own the rights to the image? They have many uploaded images like this MECU≈talk 13:59, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commons showing through. -Nv8200p talk 14:44, 26 April 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 I4 by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

watermark indicates image was likely taken from a website MECU≈talk 14:18, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

it's absolutely okay to use this image with the watermark, see the site's terms and conditions if you have any questions —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drazek (talk • contribs) 20:34, 24 March 2008

Wich website would that be anyway? The Watermark just says "Travel blog", trying to google for that turn up 7,5 million hits, could you maybe be a little more spesific. What website was it from, what page was the image on and where are these termins and conditions you refeer to? Might help clear things up a bit. Thanks. --Sherool (talk) 22:45, 24 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 as I4 by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 15:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

watermark and size indicates image likely taken from a website MECU≈talk 14:24, 22 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⚡ 15:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

uploader is claiming fair use but the fiar use argument essentially boils down to it being difficult to get a photo of the individual that would be GFDL licensed Whpq (talk) 15:24, 22 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 as I8 by East718 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 15:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Stained Glass design - No indication of date Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:35, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• As for the photo, I took it yesterday. The windows in this church are from the nineteenth century. If this is a problem, do what you will, but this is not a new window. Baronplantagenet (talk) 15:49, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• • Suggest adding date (if you have a source) to the image :) Otherwise - resolved Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:42, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Y commons showing through SkierRMH (talk) 03:56, 15 April 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 I4 by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader claims to have taken from subject's Facebook page in file history, and then added a license as copyright holder releasing image. KnightLago (talk) 15:42, 22 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 as I4 by Gwen Gale (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough informaions to be undr the public domain. "There aren't sings of copyright" not vaild reason, it still copytighted. "Free downloading" doesn't mean free license for sure OsamaK 16:51, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Moved to April 26 to allow for more discussion. Caption in articles not tagged with PUIC -Nv8200p talk 15:08, 26 April 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⚡ 15:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The uploader cites the source of the image as the website of the Jodrell Bank Observatory website, and there is no indication that images from this website are released into the public domain — Million_Moments (talk) 20:37, 22 March 2008 (UTC).[reply]

If it is just stolen from the website then delete. There should be plenty of usable shots of radio telescopes out there. Kirkmona (talk) 15:11, 13 April 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is obviously a screenshot from the series, so edit is NOT the copyright holder and cannot release to the public domain Collectonian (talk) 20:52, 22 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 as I4 by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Summary says "Tiger Team promotional photograph", but the uploader tagged it as Creative Commons Attribution Share alike 3.0 with no further clearification. Sherool (talk) 23:17, 22 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⚡ 15:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be taken from this page: http://www.soadfans.com/index.php?module=PhotoGallery&do=showpic&pid=2456&orderby=dateD a unofficial fansite. I can find no info anywhere to suggest that it's been released under the GFDL license, or even that it's fan made as they have various getty images and stuff in their gallery. Sherool (talk) 23:35, 22 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 Materialscientist (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 15:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The image contains a copyrighted album cover. — Jan Hofmann (talk) 00:10, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Does that make it non-free then? ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 08:54, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do not believe that Nelly Furtado released her album cover under a "free software license", as asserted by the uploader. --Jan Hofmann (talk) 15:53, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is probably true. Would it just be a case of re-licensing the image, or should another picture be taken? There has been a mention on the talk page about replacing the image anyway. ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 16:03, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded a new version with the cover art blotted out, might be better if someone took a new screenshot wihtout a non-free album art showing though. --Sherool (talk) 16:11, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I created a new screenshot without any copyrighted elements. Image:Rhythmbox 0.11.5.png. — Jan Hofmann (talk) 16:24, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

YOriginal image with copyrighted content deleted. -Nv8200p talk 15:04, 26 April 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.