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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:50, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Promotional photo of a notable individual. Likely copyrighted. No reason given to suggest that uploader is copyright holder. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 04:42, 29 January 2010 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:56, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Studio style photo of a notable individual. Likely copyrighted. No reason given to suggest that uploader is copyright holder. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 04:52, 29 January 2010 (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 After Midnight (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 16:11, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:4050.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Promotional image of some sort. Likely copyrighted. No reason given to suggest that uploader is copyright holder. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 05:20, 29 January 2010 (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: Erroneous Nomination. When following the listing instructions (step 2), you need to replace "Image_name.ext" with the actual name of the file. You'll also want to put your reason for deletion just after "reason=". Feel free to just replace this entire section with the corrected template. If you are still having trouble, ask for help at WT:PUF or at my talk page. AnomieBOT⚡ 07:02, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:File name.ext (delete | talk | history | logs).

• reason 77.122.63.105 (talk) 06:41, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I allow everyone to use this picture and I release it in the Public Domain.

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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:38, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fred Jüssi.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Listed as CC-by-SA-3.0 and owned by the uploader. I can see a much larger version of this image listed as (c) all-rights-reserved here on flickr that predates this upload by 3 years. If the same user then the flickr licence would be better as the same as here for verification Peripitus (Talk) 11:56, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't see what's the problem with the image? It's the same file, same size as in flickr, apparently uploaded here by the author himself - thus it doesn't matter what's the license out there in flickr. K731 (talk) 13:48, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Flickr has (902 x 1212) which is far larger than the image here. What proof do we have that they are the same authors ? I note that the uploader here (Voyag) has not given us any provenance (date, event etc...), perhaps they don't know as they did not take the original ? - Peripitus (Talk) 22:02, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do note that the flickr and Wikipedia usernames are related via the name of the flickr user's blog. - Peripitus (Talk) 22:04, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• I still claim that this discussion is a waste of time. The file was uploaded by User:Voyag, registered in March 2005 (same time as flickr user voyag - the picture originally appeared in his photostream). There's no reasonable cause not to assume good faith and not to assume they're the same person. I propose avoiding copyright paranoia and excessive wiki-bureaucracy. Thank you, K731 (talk) 14:38, 31 January 2010 (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: Keep. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 01:26, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:GozillaTron.jpeg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Multiple non-free logos in the image IngerAlHaosului (talk) 12:53, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Those logos are incidental and not the subject of the photo. — BQZip01 — ^talk 04:29, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Incidental or not they at the very least require the image license to be changed to non-free.--IngerAlHaosului (talk) 08:38, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• No, they don't. They are not the subject of the photo and are not required to be annotated in such a manner. I see no problem with making some sort of tag noting that each logo may have trademark protections, but these are 2D images and FOP applies. Otherwise, we'd have to delete every image of an athlete with a copyrightable sports logo on his jersey/helmet/hat, etc. — BQZip01 — ^talk 18:52, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Freedom_of_panorama in the United_States is for buildings only, and i don't believe the GozillaTron is a building.--IngerAlHaosului (talk) 13:06, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• That all depends on what a building is considered. I would consider it part of the stadium. It has ladders and walkways. It has power...not much different from any high school football buildings. Like I said before, these logos are not the subject of the photo. Can you take a photo of Walt Disney World when someone has a Mickey Mouse logo on a shirt? Of course you can. This is copyright paranoia. — BQZip01 — ^talk 17:02, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. A de minimis approach is taken to such logos, and BQZip is right in his statement that "those logos are incidental and not the subject of the photo", so we can keep the photograph. (It's easy to get bogged down on the FOP point though regardless, they are clearly 2D works. However, this matters not in keep the photo.) - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 18:12, 13 February 2010 (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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:38, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Death-magnetic-20080915000256588 640w.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Image is not the cover art for anything Metallica related. Non-free media use rationale is incorrect. Copyright cannot belong to record label, but may belong to a graphic artist or photographer. The licensing incorrectly states that the image is the cover of an audio recording; the image is not a form of product packaging, it is a band member image, possibly used within the packaging and not as promotion for an album. The image is non free and should be removed immediately. Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 12:57, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I may have done this incorrectly. If so, my apologies (the image does use a non-free rationale template. I still feel the image is violating policy though. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 05:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As the image is not claiming to be free this isn't really the place to bring it. It's a replaceable fair use image so I imagine it'd be a candidate for deletion under Wikipedia:SPEEDY#F7 for both criteria. Rehevkor ✉ 20:11, 6 February 2010 (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⚡ 01:50, 12 February 2010 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:56, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Agardyakos56.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Original here: http://www.pointstreak.com/prostats/playerpage.html?playerid=2288438&seasonid=3248 ccwaters (talk) 14:44, 29 January 2010 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:56, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Feedback Remixes.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Was tagged previously for Category:Possibly unfree files from 2009 November 16 but was never listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 November 16. Album cover? After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 15:05, 29 January 2010 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:56, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Poster4.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Was tagged previously for Category:Possibly unfree files from 2009 November 16 but was never listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 November 16. Album cover? After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 15:06, 29 January 2010 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:56, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Was tagged previously for Category:Possibly unfree files from 2009 November 16 but was never listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 November 16. Album cover? After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 15:07, 29 January 2010 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Veer Away (back cover).jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Was tagged previously for Category:Possibly unfree files from 2009 November 16 but was never listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 November 16. Book cover? After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 15:07, 29 January 2010 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Front cover Bad Verion 5.0.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Was tagged previously for Category:Possibly unfree files from 2009 November 16 but was never listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 November 16. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 15:07, 29 January 2010 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:SGR leaflet 08.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Was tagged previously for Category:Possibly unfree files from 2009 November 16 but was never listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 November 16. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 15:08, 29 January 2010 (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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:38, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Since the proposed date includes a significant range greater than 1923 (well, technically, 1925), it is far from obvious that this file is out of copyright in the US, and so I must propose it for deletion until a more authoritative date can be procured. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 18:02, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and keep as marked: "This image was created and is now in the public domain in the United Kingdom, because its term of copyright has expired. According to the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (c. 48), a reformation of the Copyright Act 1956 (c. 74), images fall into public domain 70 years from the death of the author. If author is unknown it falls into the public domain 70 years after it was created." This image seems to fit this description to a T. If it is PD in the UK, by treaty it is PD in the US too. — BQZip01 — ^talk 04:35, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "If it is PD in the UK, by treaty it is PD in the US too." I believe this theory is legally flawed, see the discussion at Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2010_February_9#File:Agar_Rodney_Adamson.jpg. I hope you (BQZip) will revise some of his comments in line with the legal reality. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 18:15, 13 February 2010 (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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:38, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Scarborough1929-30.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Conflicted date (I think the date copy-pasted from another similar file uploaded at the time.). However, if we assume that the file naming is correct (i.e. that the photograph was taken in 1930) it is not out of copyright in the United States. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 18:06, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep It is PD in the UK, and, by treaty, it is PD in the US as well. — BQZip01 — ^talk 04:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I believe this theory is legally flawed, see the discussion at Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2010_February_9#File:Agar_Rodney_Adamson.jpg. I hope you (BQZip) will revise some of your (BQZip's) comments in line with the legal reality. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 18:16, 13 February 2010 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:CBM-July08-cover.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Was tagged previously for Category:Possibly unfree files from 2009 November 17 but was never listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 November 17. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 18:35, 29 January 2010 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sara1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Was tagged previously for Category:Possibly unfree files from 2009 November 17 but was never listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 November 17. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 18:35, 29 January 2010 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:君临天下.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Was tagged previously for Category:Possibly unfree files from 2009 November 17 but was never listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 November 17. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 18:35, 29 January 2010 (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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:38, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:DBTarlac-Logo.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Was tagged previously for Category:Possibly unfree files from 2009 November 18 but was never listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 November 18. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 18:43, 29 January 2010 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tree carved raw file.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Was tagged previously for Category:Possibly unfree files from 2009 November 19 but was never listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 November 19. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 18:44, 29 January 2010 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:FBClogoS1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Was tagged previously for Category:Possibly unfree files from 2009 November 20 but was never listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 November 20. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 18:48, 29 January 2010 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Was tagged previously for Category:Possibly unfree files from 2009 November 20 but was never listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 November 20. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 18:48, 29 January 2010 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Falciatore4.pdf (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Was tagged previously for Category:Possibly unfree files from 2009 November 20 but was never listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 November 20. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 18:48, 29 January 2010 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:H&B aug 24.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Was tagged previously for Category:Possibly unfree files from 2009 November 21 but was never listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 November 21. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 19:24, 29 January 2010 (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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:38, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Was tagged previously for Category:Possibly unfree files from 2009 November 21 but was never listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 November 21. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 19:24, 29 January 2010 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:ILW Concert Web-flyer.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Was tagged previously for Category:Possibly unfree files from 2009 November 21 but was never listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 November 21. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 19:24, 29 January 2010 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:IMG UHlaBooks1.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Was tagged previously for Category:Possibly unfree files from 2009 November 21 but was never listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 November 21. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 19:24, 29 January 2010 (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⚡ 01:50, 12 February 2010 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Arlene Foster 08.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Apears to be a derived work of this image Fasach Nua (talk) 19:51, 29 January 2010 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Was tagged previously for Category:Possibly unfree files from 2010 January 4 but was never listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 January 4. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 20:04, 29 January 2010 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Akan12.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Was tagged previously for Category:Possibly unfree files from 2010 January 4 but was never listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 January 4. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 20:05, 29 January 2010 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 10:12, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sir John Charles Clegg.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Possible dates for the photograph include a significant range (1926 - 1937) during which time the photograph would not now be PD in the United States. There is no obvious evidence to either for or against; age is roughly right and, since it was during this period he was president of the FA, arguably it is the right time for an official-esque photograph to be taken. A better date is required before we can accept this file's copyright status. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 20:07, 29 January 2010 (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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:38, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Beckton Gasworks aerial 1930s.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Not out of copyright in the US, as was not PD in 1996. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 20:52, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, could you explain? This is a UK photo from a UK published book. The photo is uncredited in the book, and was published in the UK more than 70 years ago. Surely this makes it copyright expired. Pterre (talk) 11:09, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's very much out of copyright in the United Kingdom. Unfortunately, it is not yet out of copyright in the US (to qualify, it would have had to be public domain in the UK already by 1996, which it was not). Since the WMF hosts images in the US, we must go by their copyright laws, and therefore delete this image. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 11:15, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Berne Treaty states otherwise (see multiple examples above). — BQZip01 — ^talk 04:38, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  More importantly, the image is PD in the US after 2007 (1937+70=2007) and that is all we need. — BQZip01 — ^talk 18:55, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • I believe this theory is legally flawed, see the discussion at Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2010_February_9#File:Agar_Rodney_Adamson.jpg. I hope you (BQZip) will revise some of you (BQZip's) comments in line with the legal reality. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 18:17, 13 February 2010 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Was tagged previously for Category:Possibly unfree files from 2010 January 11 but was never listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 January 11. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 21:06, 29 January 2010 (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.