Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images/2008 April 29
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] April 29
[edit] Image:82-83.png
Same as Image:82-83.jpg and no indication of why uploader would be the copyright holder. Anyways, still orphaned and may be UE. Ricky81682 (talk) 00:39, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Levon Pachajyan.jpg
Source website given shows copyright notice. Jhony 01:30, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Posthuman Future.jpg
Image has passed its non-free notice expiration date. It can be deleted now. Lemmey talk 03:57, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Blawal.jpg
The image has many watermarks for "World Picture Network" throughout it. I belive it a copyrighted image. — Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 05:02, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Pslv-pad.jpg
The photo is at a place where it would be kinda hard to take your own photo. — F (talk) 12:21, 29 April 2008 (UTC).
- Image on commons showing. Wizardman 22:26, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Fsu banner nav.jpg
- Also nominating Image:The FSU Barnstar.png
I have not been able to find this exact image currently in use on the web, but the logo is obviously derived from the official Florida State University logo. (See the top of http://www.fsu.edu/). The uploader has a history of copyright problems so it wouldn't surprise me if the image was copied from somewhere, but even if it wasn't, it is still derivative. B (talk) 12:34, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Shreya_ghoshal.jpeg
No evidence to support CC-BY-SA claim Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:33, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:StG.jpg
Looks Old- Author certainly isn't creator as far as I can tell Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:58, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Edward_Seaga.gif
Yes, it was CC. Please remove it, it infringes rights.
[edit] Image:DettmerPortrait.jpg
Authour name doesn't match uploader- No evidence to support license claim Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:18, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Biglvov2.jpg
Post-1923 image with no source or authorship information. The uploader may have had the very common misconception that Nazi photos are in the public domain. Probably qualifies as a {{non-free historic image}}. Kelly hi! 16:53, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- Keep, Lviv at the time was a temporary occupied territory of the USSR. So, by default, the copyright rule of the modern Russian law for war-time images published anonymously kick in. By these rules, the image of this age is PD. Unless the authorship can be established, of course. --Irpen 05:46, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, it doesn't work that way...for example, American copyright law didn't apply in Japan/Germany when the U.S. occupied those countries. I'm not recommending the image's deletion, I'm asking for opinions on whether it should have a free or non-free license tag. Kelly hi! 06:05, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
- So, whose copyright is it in your opinion? --Irpen 19:02, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
- That's the problem, without a source the correct free license cannot be determined...and why I had originally tagged it with "no source" before you removed the tag. To determine the tag we need to know where and when this photo was initially published. It does say "Nazi photograph", so {{PD-HHOFFMANN}} might be applicable if the image is sourced to the National Archives - but there's no source. From what I recall, we do have some photos of the Holocaust of unknown source, but they are tagged with {{non-free historic image}} and have a rationale written why they are needed and why a copyright holder cannot be determined. Kelly hi! 19:12, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
- Source is given. It is Ghetto Fighters' House. What's your question? --Irpen 00:17, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
- And how do we determine the copyright status from that source? The whole point of giving a source is so the copyright status can be determined or verified - see WP:CITE#IMAGE. How is Ghetto Fighters' House a source for copyright purposes? Well, I requested a better source for the image, but Irpen simply removed the source request from the image. How helpful.Kelly hi! 00:33, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
- Source is given. It is Ghetto Fighters' House. What's your question? --Irpen 00:17, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
- That's the problem, without a source the correct free license cannot be determined...and why I had originally tagged it with "no source" before you removed the tag. To determine the tag we need to know where and when this photo was initially published. It does say "Nazi photograph", so {{PD-HHOFFMANN}} might be applicable if the image is sourced to the National Archives - but there's no source. From what I recall, we do have some photos of the Holocaust of unknown source, but they are tagged with {{non-free historic image}} and have a rationale written why they are needed and why a copyright holder cannot be determined. Kelly hi! 19:12, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
- So, whose copyright is it in your opinion? --Irpen 19:02, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, it doesn't work that way...for example, American copyright law didn't apply in Japan/Germany when the U.S. occupied those countries. I'm not recommending the image's deletion, I'm asking for opinions on whether it should have a free or non-free license tag. Kelly hi! 06:05, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
Irpen added a rationale and I've changed the license tag to {{non-free historic image}}. Third opinions appreciated. Kelly hi! 00:56, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
- Deleted, because with no meaningful provenance/photographer information there is no way to determine the copyright status of this image. The PD tags are speculative. It must be taken as unfree and does not fit into any WP unfree-use cats. Gwen Gale (talk) 01:24, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Volcanatitlan.jpg
No evidence that the copyright holder has released all rights. Source page says image is copyrighted. Polly (Parrot) 17:43, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- Delete unless OTRS or other evidence of free license is shown. Uploader has been inconsitant about claims as to if this is a free licenced or "fair use" image. As we have several free licensed images of this volcano on Commons, IMO no need for an unfree immage in the article. -- Infrogmation (talk) 02:06, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Fallschirmjäger.jpg
According to the copyright policy of the source, the image is copyrighted. — Daggerstab (talk) 18:34, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- As far as I can understand the copyright, the restrictions concern commercial use only--Torsteinutne (talk) 18:09, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
- Media with restrictions against commercial reuse are not considered adiquately free licensed per Wikimedia policy. -- Infrogmation (talk) 02:08, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Brian_Moriarty_1985.png
No evidence to suport self-claim Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:37, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Kanin PIC wki.PNG
The source page shows no evidence that the CC license is correct. Polly (Parrot) 21:15, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- Delete per nom unless evidence of free license is shown. -- Infrogmation (talk) 02:11, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:MeinKampf1933Edition.jpg
copyrighted book Samuell Lift me up or put me down 21:29, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- Hmmm... is the German text copyrighted in the U.S. or just the English translation? Also, just a page might qualify as fair use considering the length of the work. Phillip (talk) 01:43, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
Also falling under this discussion - Image:MeinKampf1933EditionJewishCommunity.jpg
- May be a cover shot could be used in the article, but an inside shot of the book provides no contextual improvement to a MeinKampf article or any other. --Lemmey talk 02:27, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
do you really think this bastard deserves a copyright? you must be kidding me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.196.49.103 (talk) 23:01, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Lgenorth 3guns.jpg
The source page shows no evidence of a CC license. Polly (Parrot) 21:39, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Mac is back.JPG
No evidence that the copyright holder has given permission for this image to be CC licensed. Polly (Parrot) 21:58, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Maestri.JPG
No evidence from the source page that this image is CC licensed. Polly (Parrot) 22:04, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Marzyeh Ghassemi(1).jpeg
No evidence from the source page that this image is CC licensed. Polly (Parrot) 22:25, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Turkish_Navy_G_class_frigates.jpg
This is probably just a promotional license. The tag says that the terms for commercial use is listed in the link. What are these terms. Does the copyright holder allow derivative works? Rettetast (talk) 22:30, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- These images can be used in any article which describes the Turkish Navy or the Republic of Turkey properly and appropriately, such as in the Turkish Navy or the Republic of Turkey articles. The Turkish Navy feels happy to be promoted appropriately in Wikipedia. Nevertheless, these are Turkish Government images and we would be delighted if they won't be used in "inappropriate" and "unrelated" articles. For more information, feel free to contact me from project.milgem@turkishnavy.com 151.57.204.215 (talk) 04:58, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Also Image:G class frigate of the Turkish Navy.jpg Image:Turkish Navy SAT commandos.jpg Image:G class frigates.jpg Image:Turkish Navy missile boats.jpg Image:Turkish Navy frigates.jpg Image:Turkish Navy Seahawk helicopters.jpg Image:Turkish Navy Tepe class frigates.jpg Image:Turkish Navy Preveze class submarines.jpg Image:Turkish Navy Kılıç class missile boats.jpg Image:II class missile boats.jpg Image:Turkish Navy SalihReis class frigates.jpg. Rettetast (talk) 22:39, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- You can contact me from project.milgem@turkishnavy.com (I uploaded these images). They were released to the internet several years ago and no longer exist in the current Turkish Navy website, which was recently renovated. Numerous websites on the internet use these images. 151.57.204.215 (talk) 04:22, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
- Deleted. These images are not free, they are copyrighted and have use restrictions. Moreover, no non-free use rationales were given. Gwen Gale (talk) 01:44, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Bellevue-Washington.jpg
From photobucket with unknown author is not a sufficient source. Ricky81682 (talk) 22:31, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Masquerade Ball.jpg
Can see no evidence of the CC license from the source provided. Polly (Parrot) 22:42, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Solomon2.jpg
no evidence of CC-license Rettetast (talk) 22:51, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Eb1e 12.jpg
The image was taken from ebay, it's unlikely that it was actually released into the public domain. BlueAzure (talk) 23:48, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- Deleted, also orphan. -- Infrogmation (talk) 02:13, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Zeng Chengwei.jpg
No evidence from the source page that the GNU license is correct. Polly (Parrot) 23:50, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
