The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 after being retagged as fair use; but now tagged as ((di-no fair use rationale)). –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 02:02, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unless the uploader works for E!, and somehow owns this image, their claim of having created the image is hardly likely. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 05:38, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reduce and keep Since the user, Fanuc18, has a Talk Page filled with notices for images with copyright problems (some of which have been deleted), as well as a block for ignoring warnings to cease creating A1 pages, it's likely that his assertion that he is the copyright holder is a lie. Since the image can legitimately be used in the Kourtney and Khloé Take Miami article, albeit not at its current resolution, I put a reduction tag on it, but its license/permission tag still needs to be changed to a Promo Material one. Can someone do that? Nightscream (talk) 22:22, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment reduce supplied & license changed. Skier Dude (talk) 05:16, 21 September 2009 (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⚡ 03:53, 22 September 2009 (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 image 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:53, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Declined speedy. Very likely not the work of the uploader. Protonk (talk) 05:57, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: I don't see that it's very useful even if it is the work of the uploader. I cannot envisage any practical use for this low quality cartoon image in any article, especially as there is already an undisputed free use image on the Matt Smith (actor) page. magnius (talk) 10:52, 8 September 2009 (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 image 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:53, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: No evidence is given that this is a free image except that it is claimed to be so by the uploader who states it was scanned from a book for which no information is provided, so is likely copyright unless proven otherwise. ww2censor (talk) 14:03, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: If there are doubts about the copyright of the file that i uploaded, then it should be deleted. --Pyrite101 (talk) 14:55, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You know where you got it from, perhaps it is ok if the book is in the public domain but you did not give us any info. Add it and we can review it. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 15:49, 8 September 2009 (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 image 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: Kept the current versions, but deleting the old revisions. --Sherool (talk) 00:43, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The underlying map looks like a scan of a copyrighted product. Note that this issue would apply to everything listed at User:Nima_Farid#Iran, since the user appears to have done the same thing for each road. (ESkog)^(Talk) 12:48, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: The uploader has removed the list from his userpage. The images in question are:
  • Image:Road 2.jpg
  • Image:Road 7.JPG
  • Image:Road 9.jpg
  • Image:Road 16.jpg
  • Image:Road22.JPG
  • File:Road 37.jpg
  • Image:Road 44.jpg
  • Image:Road 48.jpg
  • Image:Road 49.jpg
  • Image:Road 55.jpg
  • Image:Road 59.jpg
  • Image:Road 62.jpg
  • Image:Road 65.jpg
  • Image:Road 71.jpg
  • Image:Road 77.jpg
  • Image:Road 78.jpg
  • Image:Road 79.jpg
  • Image:Road 86.jpg
  • Image:Road 96.jpg
  • File:Road 39.jpg
  • File:Road 51.jpg

• Don't delete: I've deleted the map and replaced it with a public domain map File:Blank-Map-Iran.PNG

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 image 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: Already deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs), just finishing up closing. --Sherool (talk) 01:10, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File description says you took the pictures while on duty as a State employee, so presumably they belong to the state. Not sure whether you can release your work into the public domain simply by posting it to Wikipedia. 72.83.88.40 (talk) 00:15, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure that PD before 1923 applies either if the meta data says July 2003 and June 2003! MilborneOne (talk) 15:11, 13 September 2009 (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.