Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images/2008 April 10
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] April 10
[edit] Image:Kanymusik.jpg
License as pd-self but looks like a publicity photo Shinerunner (talk) 01:32, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:5a0utxbr.jpg
No indication why this pokemon can be released by the uploader. Ricky81682 (talk) 04:17, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Noelfielding.jpg
Uploaded by apparent vandal-only account; copyright message in image. Jfire (talk) 06:10, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Mancouldkill 4x6 front-40.jpg
author does not appear to be uploader and it is unlikely that a tour poster would be released under a free license Genisock2 (talk) 11:24, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Allison mack.jpg
Clear copyvio of this. asenine t/c 13:30, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Jp498 20030517 DSC 0011.jpg
No reference to this image copyright status. Sdrtirs (talk) 13:40, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
This is a GNU licensed image. I photographed it and uploaded it myself. What needs to be changed to make it's status clear or acceptable? --Jp498 (talk) 19:22, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Image on commons showing. Wizardman 22:56, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:SGGS restored.jpg
Image is claimed to be GFDL because source is another wiki. Source given there is The Sikh Education Council (UK) http://www.thesikhway.com/ A thumbnail version of this image is on their Projects page. Many links on the website don't work including the Terms of Use at the bottom of each page. The Contact page seems nonfunctional. The email address listed in whois bounces. In short, there is no way to verify that this image has been released under GFDL --Geniac (talk) 15:44, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Site not working right + no copyright status on other wiki + no other source info = unable to accept image. Wizardman 23:05, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Dannytouchbw.PNG
No evidence uploader is copyright holder. Kelly hi! 17:49, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- And the uploader (me) makes no claim of being the copyright holder. I only make claim that the image is released under the GFDL per the explicit permission notice at the website (a link to which has always been provided on the image page).--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 19:19, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, the sitesays it's copyight under the gfdl, which sounds a little confusing but I can AGF in this case. Wizardman 23:01, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Mariahfile2345.jpg
There is no proof that this picture is "self-created" other than the tag. It appears to be a pic from a news agency, and is an edited picture from a fan site. — SKS2K6 (talk) 18:03, 10 April 2008 (UTC).
[edit] Image:Syria.Sharaa.01.jpg
Most likely image is from a copyrighted website, indicated by no metadata and image size. Polly (Parrot) 19:51, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Annette2.jpg
Licensed as Multilicense replacing placeholder, but appears to be a publicity photo. — Ebyabe (talk) 23:17, 10 April 2008 (UTC).
[edit] Image:Eric-johnson2.jpg
Licensed as Multilicense replacing placeholder, but appears to be a publicity photo. — Ebyabe (talk) 23:17, 10 April 2008 (UTC).
[edit] Image:SamJones 3.jpg
Licensed as Multilicense replacing placeholder, but appears to be a publicity photo. — Ebyabe (talk) 23:17, 10 April 2008 (UTC).
