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: moot point. SchuminWeb (Talk) 02:23, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Haunted Hollow Alton Towers.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• The satellite imagery underlying these notations isn't free as it has been sourced from Google (you can see part of their watermark under the pinkish box on the right hand side). Themeparkgc  Talk  02:29, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: the user has now uploaded a free version without the satellite imagery behind it, thus my rationale above is no longer correct. I have tagged the image with ((Orphaned non-free revisions)) so the version with the satellite image will be deleted. Themeparkgc  Talk  22:32, 21 October 2012 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Owen Ramsay Nares.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Tagged ((PD-US)), but the date of this photograph is unknown and there is no evidence (either on the file description page or on the source page) that it was published before 1 January 1923. —Bkell (talk) 07:13, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Look at the upload summary; it was originally tagged with an EU public domain tag. Is this potentially valid? Nyttend (talk) 13:59, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Matticus78 didn't think so. —Bkell (talk) 16:48, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • ((EU image)) was later renamed to ((Non-free EU website image)) and subsequently deleted per Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 December 21#Template:Non-free EU website image. It's not a free licence but a non-free licence. Anyway, EU licence templates don't affect the United States copyright status of unpublished photos, and there's no evidence of publication. In most cases, EU licence templates only affect whether an image may be ((Not-PD-US-URAA)); EU images still typically require publication without copyright notice or copyright renewal in order to be in the public domain in the United States. See WP:Non-U.S. copyrights#Subsisting copyrights. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:55, 27 October 2012 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Robbie McCallum.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:Sixty-cups-of-coffee.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:Life-by-the-drop.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:I'll-Be-Your-Dog.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Lots of conflicting information here. The summaries appear to credit these images to Thinking Ink Media, Amazon, and/or Raygun Films, while the licensing tags claim they were created by the uploader. The summaries say "public domain," while the licensing tags say they're licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0. It is unclear what the real source and licensing status are. —Bkell (talk) 07:39, 21 October 2012 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:LazarevicHrebeljanovicCoatofArms.gif (delete | talk | history | logs).

• This image is not a 14th-century Lazarević coat of arms, could not have been published then, and the "author" is spurious. Image seems to have been copied from [1] on http://ovsiste.webs.com/teachingcourses.htm which is "All Rights Reserved by Vladislav B. Sotirovic 2005-2015" bobrayner (talk) 14:21, 21 October 2012 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:02, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Taylor and Burton - Cleopatra.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Listed as "© Sunset Boulevard/Corbis" at Corbis Images. We hope (talk) 16:35, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

From copyright.gov:

Type of Work: Motion Picture

Registration Number / Date: RE0000544757 / 1991-09-23

Renewal registration for: LP0000028304 / 1963-06-19

Title: Cleopatra. By Twentieth Century-Fox Productions, Ltd.

Copyright Claimant: Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation (PWH)

We hope (talk) 03:09, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Per related discussion, this is not a movie you're tagging, but a photo. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 20:05, 22 October 2012 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:02, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Taylor-Newman-promo.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Black & white copy of the file is listed as "Copyright: 2011 Getty Images" at Getty. We hope (talk) 16:38, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

From copyright.gov:

Type of Work: Motion Picture

Registration Number / Date: RE0000279402 / 1986-01-03

Renewal registration for: LP0000011871 / 1958-08-12

Title: Cat on a hot tin roof. By Loew’s, Inc. and Avon Productions, Inc.

Copyright Claimant: M G M/U A Entertainment Company, Weingarten December 12, 1967 Trust, Pandro C. Berman & Kathryn Berman (PWH)

Variant title: Cat on a hot tin roof.

We hope (talk) 03:13, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Per related discussion, this is not a movie you're tagging, but a photo. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 20:04, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, because either it was published with a copyright notice, or it wasn't. Getty definitely didn't copyright the related film or any of the related images just last year; it's obviously a false claim. You need to provide proof that this image was published with a copyright notice or enough evidence that we can reasonably doubt the no-notice statement, and the things you quote don't do that at all. Nyttend (talk) 13:56, 27 October 2012 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Image is part of a series of hundreds of likely copyvios uploaded by a series of now indef-blocked socks dating back to 2006. See Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Conk 9. GrapedApe (talk) 16:59, 21 October 2012 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:'Eleven Installation in Berlin.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• German FOP doesn't apply indoors. This might be the same photo. Stefan2 (talk) 18:13, 21 October 2012 (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: permission received. SchuminWeb (Talk) 02:27, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Orlando Museum of Art.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• I did indeed produce this photograph. As I wish to maintain my privacy, any action necessary to prove that will need to be performed by an oversighter. (I do appreciate the nominator looking out for my interests though). - MrX 19:03, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since the image appeared outside Wikipedia before it appeared on Wikipedia, you need to follow the instructions at WP:CONSENT. --Stefan2 (talk) 19:29, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm not aware of any such policy. What is the point of including that information with the upload and having to email a consent form? Could you please direct me to the relevant policy that supports your assertion? Thanks - MrX 19:35, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • See WP:IOWN. The upload form does not prove ownership if the image appeared elsewhere on the Internet before you uploaded it here. Someone other than the copyright holder might have downloaded the image from the other website and uploaded it here without consent from the copyright holder. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:03, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: OTRS permission received and ticket added to the file description page. – Connormah (talk) 05:06, 22 October 2012 (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 F9 by SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:00, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mohammed Al Sheiba.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Also used by Aljazeera and others in 2009 in lower resolution. Stefan2 (talk) 18:52, 21 October 2012 (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 F3 by RHaworth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 23:00, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:LorenzoPena2007.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• According to the file information page, the licence is given here. That page returns a 404 message. Stefan2 (talk) 19:58, 21 October 2012 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:02, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dynetech Centre.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Google tells that the image used to be hosted by Panoramio. According to Google's search page, it seems that the image was added to Panoramio in 2011. Stefan2 (talk) 20:13, 21 October 2012 (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 F9 by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 22:11, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Invalid PD claim Eeekster (talk) 20:15, 21 October 2012 (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 F9 by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 22:11, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Claims to have been created in 2010 which conflicts with the PD reasoning. Eeekster (talk) 20:16, 21 October 2012 (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 SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:02, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Orlando City Hall.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Google tells that the image used to be hosted by Panoramio. According to Google's search page, it seems that the image was added to Panoramio in 2011. Stefan2 (talk) 20:21, 21 October 2012 (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 G7 by SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:00, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sculpture in front of the Orlando City Hall.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

You can't upload photos of public artworks located in the United States, unless the copyright to the artwork has expired. See Commons:COM:FOP#United States. Stefan2 (talk) 20:24, 21 October 2012 (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 F9 by SchuminWeb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:00, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:My own work2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Appears to be a screen capture Eeekster (talk) 20:25, 21 October 2012 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rockport Wreck plaque - IMG 5424.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Violates the copyright of the text on the sign. Stefan2 (talk) 20:29, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Please kindly cite regulation by which text on a public plaque is subject to copyright laws.WallyFromColumbia (talk) 21:05, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • See Commons:COM:FOP#United States. Photos of the plaque can not be uploaded until the copyright has expired on 1 January 2116. --Stefan2 (talk) 02:07, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Please explain why a copyright expires on January 1, 2116. The plaque is not copyrighted. Please kinsly explain why it is considered to be copyrighted.WallyFromColumbia (talk) 14:47, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • See Commons:Commons:Public art and copyrights in the US. This plaque was set up after 1977, so it is an unpublished work. It is likely a work for hire, so the copyright expires 120 years after the text was written. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:12, 24 October 2012 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rockport Wreck - showing wrecked engine 1104.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Ownership of the negatives is not the same thing as ownership of the copyright. No evidence of publication. Unpublished anonymous photos are copyrighted for 120 years since creation in the United States. Stefan2 (talk) 20:31, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• I never stated that I own the negatives. I have a copy of the 1925 photo, which I scanned into digital format. The original negative, which was shot by a company photographer, was owned by the Lackawanna Railroad, but was donated to Syracuse University in the 1950s. The Lackawanna Railroad never copyrighted any of its photos, and ceased to exist as a legal entity in 1960. In 2012, Syracuse University conveyed all photos from its Lackawanna Railroad collection to Steamtown National Historic Site in Scranton, PA. As a result, the original photo is in the public domain because it is now owned by the US federal government.WallyFromColumbia (talk) 20:57, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • You seemed to state that the copyright was transferred to the US federal government, but you haven't provided any evidence of this. As I wrote, ownership of the negatives is not the same thing as ownership of the copyright. Also, you have misunderstood the rule about US government copyrights. If a work was made by the United States federal government, then the work is in the public domain. However, if the work was made by someone else, then the work is subject to the standard copyright rules even if the copyright might be held by the government. This was not taken by a US government employee as part of his work as a US government employee, so ((PD-USGov)) doesn't apply. --Stefan2 (talk) 02:12, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sorry, I misspoke. There is no copyright, nor was there ever a copyright. The railroad never copyrighted any of its photos. So, there never was a copyright to be transferred to the National Park Service.WallyFromColumbia (talk) 14:43, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • What you wrote is plain wrong. All works have been copyrighted at one point. If the photo is unpublished (i.e. not published before 2003), then the copyright expires 120 years after the photo was taken. If the photo was published before 1 March 1989 and certain other conditions apply, then the photo is in the public domain, but there is no evidence that it was ever published before 1 March 1989. If you are claiming that it has been published before 1 March 1989, then you need to tell where it was published so that the other conditions can be verified. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:16, 24 October 2012 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lackawanna Cut-Off in New Jersey Map - Feb 2012.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Derivative work of a map on a computer screen. Stefan2 (talk) 20:32, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• The map was created by me and then photographed from the computer screen.WallyFromColumbia (talk) 21:00, 21 October 2012 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lackawanna Cut-Off Map.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

• See above: very similar image, so this is probably also a derivative work of a map on a computer screen. Stefan2 (talk) 20:33, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Please see my response statement above.WallyFromColumbia (talk) 21:01, 21 October 2012 (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 Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:01, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Sourced to Twitter, but the Twitter link is dead. Also claimed to be own work, but if it appeared on Twitter before it appeared here, we need a confirmation about this from the Twitter user. Stefan2 (talk) 20:36, 21 October 2012 (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.