Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images/2007 December 24
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] December 24
[edit] Image:Patriot game artwork 1.png
Claims to be pd-self but I doubt that's true if it's concept art for a video game. Otherwise, it could be a hoax image. Either way, it should be deleted. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters wish you a Merry Fishmas! • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 01:31, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Trillium_rugelii.jpg
PD-USGov-Military-Army-USACE license is being questioned. Jusjih (talk) 03:22, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. If you look through the specific credits page, certain images are attributed to various sources. Trillium was not among those cited, and thus I think it can be inferred that this was indeed a product of the US Government. IronGargoyle (talk) 17:46, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
-
- Image kept per IronGargoyle -Nv8200p talk 04:16, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:EltonBrandLAClippers.JPG
Image is tagged as "All rights reserved", not CC-BY-3.0 as the uploader claims. 98.204.112.111 (talk) 05:18, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Adrienne wilkinson.jpg
no indication of release of rights at source website, appears to be a copyrighted publicity still ˉˉanetode╦╩ 07:20, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- The copyright notice asserts that permission has been given to use the image provided that attribution is also given, plus there's a link to the original. However, in the first place there's no proof at the given link or anywhere else I can find that such permission has been given. And in the second place, the original image (here) is not the same as the one on Wikipedia: it is clearly watermarked. I'd say that chances are high that the uploader removed the watermark and falsely asserted permission to use the work. -- Hux (talk) 10:29, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Shimon peres tami ben ami.jpg
There's no source and it is very unlikely that it is GFDL. — Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 12:02, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- This picture rocks! I think it should stay on here FOREVER! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sheryl Farsque (talk • contribs) 21:11, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- No licensing information. Almost certainly non-free image. Delete. -- Hux (talk) 10:31, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Brandy2007.jpg
Requested for speedy deletion as a copyvio, but user who uploaded claims that contacted the author which agreed to license under cc-by-sa-2.5 Carlosguitar (ready and willing) 15:38, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- I think I'm right in saying that if an editor claims to have received permission to use the image under a free license, evidence of that must be emailed to Wikipedia. Otherwise, anyone could just falsely claim that the owner had given such permission. -- Hux (talk) 10:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:C38c.jpg
No evidence uploader is copyright holder. Videmus Omnia Talk 19:38, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Menahem Golan.jpg
No source. Image unlikely to be GFDL. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 21:24, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Samak.jpg
Looks like a formal image created by some official agency, no explanation as to how the uploader is the copyright holder. Corvus cornixtalk 21:51, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Animorphs Spread.jpg
Originally listed at WP:CP under title "covers are copyrighted". This is a gray area, IMO, as this appears to involve some artwork on the part of the owner. The Evil Spartan (talk) 22:15, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- It might be okay if it was re-tagged as fair use, instead of pd-self. --Icarus (Hi!) 09:21, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- Generally speaking, the use of copyrighted book cover images is limited to articles about the book, for illustration purposes only. Self-made images like this cross the line into infringing territory, AFAIK, since they're basically derivative works that are a) not essential in any article, and b) completely based on existing copyrighted works. Pity though, because it looks nice. :) -- Hux (talk) 10:38, 24 January 2008 (UTC)