< July 1	July 3 >

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; deleted by Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:03, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mustang Probe.jpeg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Description says "Photo by Synthetex and Ron Mondrush" which conflicts with the copyright ownership claim. Eeekster (talk) 00:48, 2 July 2014 (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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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; deleted by Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:03, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:20 GM W Body Production.jpeg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Description says "Photo by Synthetex and Ron Mondrush" which conflicts with the copyright ownership claim. Eeekster (talk) 00:50, 2 July 2014 (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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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; deleted by Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:03, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:11 GM Art Center Pace car.jpeg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Description says "Photo by Synthetex and Ron Mondrush" which conflicts with the copyright ownership claim. Eeekster (talk) 00:51, 2 July 2014 (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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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; deleted by Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:03, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Concept Model of Ford's Ranchero Scrambler.jpeg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Description says "Photo by Synthetex and Ron Mondrush" which conflicts with the copyright ownership claim. Eeekster (talk) 00:52, 2 July 2014 (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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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; deleted by Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:03, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:08 AMC Renault R5 Aero Wedge yellow.jpeg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Description says "Photo by Synthetex and Ron Mondrush" which conflicts with the copyright ownership claim. Eeekster (talk) 00:52, 2 July 2014 (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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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; deleted as G7 by Jenks24 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:10, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:S5 Active vs S5.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

appears to be a shot from a video (see this later frame) - visible online see here). Peripitus (Talk) 09:27, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just deleted two images, claimed to be self-made, but the only thing done by self was to crop out material which indicated that it came from elsewhere. I am very concerned that this editor does not understand our copyright rules; see a talk page comment where editor thinks it is OK to upload questionable material to Wikipedia, if it cannot go to Commons.--S Philbrick (Talk) 12:50, 2 July 2014 (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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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; deleted by Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:03, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pir Roshan.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Incorrect authorship claim and copyright tag, see [1]. This is a painting of a historic person, so the picture might be in the public domain because of age, but we need a source confirming this. Stefan2 (talk) 12:04, 2 July 2014 (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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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: Kept as a non-free image. - Peripitus (Talk) 23:48, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ashenden—first edition cover.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

No evidence that the person who created the cover died more than two years before it was published as required by the copyright tag used. Stefan2 (talk) 12:12, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Stefan2:, Despite a search to find out, there is no information relating to the designer of the cover, and it was possibly undertaken in-house. Do you know who it was, so it can be checked out? Have you undertaken any searches to find any designer's information? you may have had more success than I have if you have, but my searches have found no further information, so I'm not sure there is justification here for deleting. - SchroCat (talk) 12:59, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- If you wish to use ((PD-URAA)) for a British cover published in 1928, then you need to provide evidence that the cover designer is known and that he died before 1926. If he is unknown, or if he died after 1925, then the copyright tag isn't valid. --Stefan2 (talk) 13:05, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Stefan2: As I have said in the post above this, the designer is unknown. It would be difficult to say when this unknown individual died... - SchroCat (talk) 13:07, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as a non-free book cover. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 11:44, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why not as a free one? The illustrator is anonymous and unknown - the Victoria and Albert Museum: " Illustrator, anonymous". You can see the full cover in facsimile, showing no designer details (and this is a company who is happy to sell facsimile reprints, so they are happy with the copyright status here. - SchroCat (talk) 11:29, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

From the above it's clear that ((PD-EU-no author disclosure)) could be applied for the source country, but what license tag would apply for the United States? Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:16, 11 July 2014 (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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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: Kept. Same camera as Rodolph's other photos clinches it - Peripitus (Talk) 23:37, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Central medallion of a Meissen plate.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

Photograph of a 3D item (a plate or something), so permission from the photographer is needed. Stefan2 (talk) 12:19, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am both the uploader & photographer, (as per description).Rodolph (talk) 22:16, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Rodolph: You need to release your photo into the public domain or under a free licence since you own the copyright to it. If you add the licence of your choice to the description page (eg ((PD-self)), ((self|cc-by-sa-4.0)) etc) that should resolve the issue. January (talk) 19:37, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

thank you, yes, but I did'nt think it fair to claim it as all my own work, as it is'nt, I just took the photo.Rodolph (talk) 22:35, 12 July 2014 (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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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; deleted by Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:03, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Baby-peggy-fdr.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

There is not sufficient source information to verify the claim about the death year of the photographer. Previously tagged as a work by the US government, which is also unverifiable. Stefan2 (talk) 13:06, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- the Salon Magazine article that featured this photo did not have a copyright mark attached to this 1924 photo. Since they usually have a mark for photos that *are* in copyright, this would strongly indicate that this photo is not in copyright. Paul Austin (talk) 06:18, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - There is no way to verify that it was published in the Salon Magazine, or that it was before 1 March 1989 as required by ((PD-US-no notice)) and ((PD-US-1978-89)). --Stefan2 (talk) 10:54, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    - this Wall Street Journal article indicates that Baby Peggy/Diana Serra Cary owns the the photo herself and supplied it to WSJ through Milestone, the people who made the documentary about her. I don't think she would object to it being used here. Paul Austin (talk) 14:40, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      - None of the images on that page works, so I can't tell whether the image is supposed to be used there or not. None of the image captions provides any information about the publication history of the images, so the copyright status of the image can't be determined. If you wish to show that the image is in the public domain, you need to provide more information about the publication history of the image. --Stefan2 (talk) 16:26, 3 July 2014 (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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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; deleted by Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:03, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Paul1999.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

It says "My high school photo. 1999". This suggests that it wasn't taken by the uploader as claimed, but by a professional high school photographer. Permission from the photographer or his employer is required. Stefan2 (talk) 13:18, 2 July 2014 (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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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; deleted by Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:03, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Paul intensive care 1980.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

The uploader claims that this is a photograph of the uploader, taken by the uploader. Since the subject of the photograph is attached to various medical devices, I do not see how the subject of the photograph possibly also could be the photographer. Permission is needed from the photographer, see WP:CONSENT. Stefan2 (talk) 13:20, 2 July 2014 (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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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; deleted by Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:03, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Paul chest surgery 1983.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

The uploader claims that this is a photograph of the uploader, taken by the uploader. Since the uploader is busy petting a teddy bear, I can't see how the uploader possibly could be the photographer. Permission is needed from the photographer (and note also c:COM:TOYS). Stefan2 (talk) 13:21, 2 July 2014 (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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.