The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Source is a Flickr page that no longer exists. Unable to verify the license. – Quadell (talk) 15:38, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:COPYVIO of http://www.monroegop.com/i/maggie-brooks.jpg; User:Mountmiey's claim of PD-USGov appears to be false. DanielPenfield (talk) 17:21, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
appears to be scan of yearbook, thus (c) would not be held by uploader Skier Dude (talk) 19:34, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
given size & lack of metadata, and given the uploader's name (IntegrityMedia1) this is most likely a promo shot Skier Dude (talk) 20:18, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
orphaned, absent uploader, appears to be a publicity shot Skier Dude (talk) 20:20, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
orphaned, appears to be a publicity shot Skier Dude (talk) 20:33, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: Verified PD
Has 1926 copyright notice & no reason to assume this not renewed or that uploader owns copyright. Simon Speed (talk) 21:06, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Given focus & background appears to be an official headshot - uploader would not be (c) holder Skier Dude (talk) 21:32, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
given focus & background & summary "headshot", unlikely uploader is (c) holder Skier Dude (talk) 21:33, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
given crosshatching (no metadata), it appears that this is a screenshot, no source provided Skier Dude (talk) 21:34, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
claims to be band logo, if so, uploader would not be (c) holder Skier Dude (talk) 21:37, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: Free image
orphaned, badly cropped photograph of another photograph - possibly PD-old? Skier Dude (talk) 21:38, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
no source provided, appears to be professional shot Skier Dude (talk) 21:47, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
album cover, claims to be "100% my original work.", if this is not the official cover it doesn't belong here Skier Dude (talk) 21:51, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
appears to be professional headshot, thus uploader would not be (c) holder Skier Dude (talk) 21:51, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
appears to be professional headshot, thus uploader would not be (c) holder Skier Dude (talk) 21:52, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
given border, low resolution, lack of metadata, suspect taken from uncited web site Skier Dude (talk) 21:55, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
given quality of image & dates of subject, most likely a scan of a newspaper or other source Skier Dude (talk) 21:56, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
orphaned, given resolution & focus appears to be publicity/professional shot Skier Dude (talk) 22:01, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
appears to be publicity headshot, thus the (c) would not be (c) holder Skier Dude (talk) 22:04, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
really doubt that the uploader of this image is the (c) holder Skier Dude (talk) 22:13, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
appears to be a publicity shot, complete with signature Skier Dude (talk) 22:15, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was: Free image
highly doubt that the uploader is the (c) holder of this most likely PD-old Skier Dude (talk) 22:16, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
given resolution & artifacts, appears to be screenshot or scan Skier Dude (talk) 22:18, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
given slight blur is most likely a screenshot of an older TV programme Skier Dude (talk) 22:19, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
given image quality, bad cropping, 'tis most likely a screenshot of a TV programme Skier Dude (talk) 22:19, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
given image quality, appears to be publicity shot Skier Dude (talk) 22:21, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 18:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
appears to be a scan of a yearbook, no source provided Skier Dude (talk) 22:24, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
given crosshatching 'tis a scan or screenshot, no source provided Skier Dude (talk) 22:26, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
given focus & resolution & background, appears to be publicity headshot Skier Dude (talk) 22:28, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
given crosshatching, no metadata, bad photoshopping & border, most likely taken from non-sourced website & then altered Skier Dude (talk) 22:30, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
given background & focus, most likely official government photo, no source Skier Dude (talk) 22:37, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
orphaned, given background & focus, most likely official publicity shot Skier Dude (talk) 22:38, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
orphaned, given background & focus, most likely official publicity shot Skier Dude (talk) 22:39, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]