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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:04, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Oldbank3.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• The given source website - http://www.decaturparks.com/ - gives no indication that this is a valid license B (talk) 02:24, 26 June 2011 (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.-FASTILY ^(TALK) 00:11, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:DSC01489.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Photo of a calculator, whilst claimed PD-self this probably constitutes an unauthorized derivative work. Orphaned. Acather96 (talk) 07:34, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep (as PD, its usefulness otherwise is an IFD question, wherein I would opine delete). See commons:Commons:Derivative_works#Isn.27t_every_product_copyrighted_by_someone.3F_What_about_cars.3F_Or_kitchen_chairs.3F_My_computer_case.3F. Objects that are primarily utilitarian in nature are not subject to copyright and can be photographed all day long. --B (talk) 12:43, 26 June 2011 (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.-FASTILY ^(TALK) 00:11, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:DSC01493.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

• See above Acather96 (talk) 07:35, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep (as PD, its usefulness otherwise is an IFD question, wherein I would opine delete). See commons:Commons:Derivative_works#Isn.27t_every_product_copyrighted_by_someone.3F_What_about_cars.3F_Or_kitchen_chairs.3F_My_computer_case.3F. Objects that are primarily utilitarian in nature are not subject to copyright and can be photographed all day long. --B (talk) 12:43, 26 June 2011 (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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 00:04, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Anna chandy judge.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• The link does not state that the image was first published prior to 1951. If the image is indeed taken during the time that she was judge then it will not enter into PD for another eight years at the least, unless released by the photographer, for which we have no evidence. The permission link only provides rules on copyright in India, not specific to this particular image. —SpacemanSpiff 11:54, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Someone transferred the image to Commons commons:File:Anna chandy judge.jpg. Please nominate that one for deletion if this file is determined to be non-free. – Adrignola talk 15:18, 7 July 2011 (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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:04, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Metro Manila in 2010.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• No source and author specified. No exif data. Low resolution for a fairly new photo. Uploader has history of contributing copyvios. Moray An Par (talk) 12:33, 26 June 2011 (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: Withdrawn –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 22:33, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Copyedit barnstar.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Unclear licensing; File:Pencil.jpg and File:Eraser.jpg are clearly not the images used to compose this image. Recommend deletion due to unclear licensing, and replacing all uses of the image with File:Copyedit Barnstar Hires.png. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 15:34, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW the file referenced in the description is not either of the above but File:Pencil and Eraser.jpg, which is PD per the uploader’s licence. The source barnstar is CC BY-SA 3.0, which would presumably apply to the derivative work.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 21:46, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. I had read it as the .jpg extension applying to two separate images. I failed miserably. Thank you, and withdrawn. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 22:33, 3 July 2011 (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) 00:10, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:DeclineOfTheEnglishMurder.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

• I believe it is free use under British copyright laws, which i know differ from US copyright laws. It was being used, in the EN:WP article, as a cover, which is covered (excuse repeat) under UK copyright laws if you use the cover without attempt to reproduce it i.e. at lower quality. But if it is not being used, better to delete it, agree. Si Trew (talk) 10:07, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Clearly a book cover , but tagged as CC-BY-SA Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:21, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• • It is clearly a book cover and allowable under the WP:EN rules and under British law (I know Californian law differs but let's do both) it is 50 years after the death of the author. The only copyright in it can be the copyright of the artist for the front cover. It is fair use. by WP:EN but not maybe by commons.

• • The point is good, because if a book is then reillustrated in its cover by a new artist, the copyright for the words is with the author and the endflyers with the artist. A nice point. Si Trew (talk) 10:14, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• • If I remember correctly (all my books are stored away ready for moving) the cover is by Peter Blake. Si Trew (talk) 10:38, 28 June 2011 (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⚡ 06:10, 4 July 2011 (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 F4 by Calmer Waters (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 06:10, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Screen shot 2011-06-26 at 9.38.12 AM.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

• File name "Screen shot" indicates it may not fall under specified licensing. Phospheros (talk) 19:01, 26 June 2011 (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: Delete.-FASTILY ^(TALK) 00:12, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:DTVPal Plus product shot.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:DTVPal DVR product shot.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• No evidence of permission (like OTRS). Since the image isn't being used anyway, better to be on the safe side and delete the image in case permission wasn't properly granted. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 19:22, 26 June 2011 (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.