Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images/2008 January 26

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< January 25 January 27 >

Contents

[edit] January 26

[edit] Underwriters Laboratories images

  • Image:Electrical test.jpg
  • Image:Sprinkler pipe testing.jpg
  • Image:Look for UL 2.jpg
  • Image:Look for UL.jpg

Claimed by uploader to be PD/GFDL, yet are almost certainly copyrighted publicity photos. In fact, Image:Look for UL 2.jpg and Image:Look for UL.jpg clearly say "Copyright 2006 Howard Ash Photography" in their metadata. --Tom (talk - email) 00:37, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:WWERawHDSet.PNG

This image isn't probably a free use image. It was previously uploaded from WWE.com, but deleted due to same reasons. TrUCo9311 01:52, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


The image is a photo from the WWE, and is the new set used for the event. Source: WWE.com. This is it's copyright : All World Wrestling Entertainment programming, talent names, images, likenesses, slogans, wrestling moves, and logos are the exclusive property of World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. ECW is a trademark of WWE Libraries, Inc. All other trademarks, logos and copyrights are the property of their respective owners. © 2008 World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Fair use rationale: It is believed that this image is subject to fair use in the article WWE Raw because:

This image illustrates the text next to which it appears. It does not limit the copyright owner's rights to market or sell the work in any way. The image is being used in an informative way and should not detract from the original work. No free or public domain images have been located for this item.  wwesocks  02:31, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Exactly because the set just debuted this week, we prefer to upload images by people who have taken photos of the set (as apart of the audience), images by WWE are discouraged.--TrUCo9311 02:35, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Sammyhomers.jpg

This appears to be a scaled down cropped version of this photo. However, the page it appears on seems to post copyrighted photos, so it's unclear who owns the rights to the image. It appears to be a press photo, and at the very least, needs clarification on its source and copyright status. Mosmof (talk) 02:34, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Alice shrugged wiki.png

This image uses the Wikipedia logo, copyrighted by the Wikimedia Foundation. However, the image is licensed under the GFDL-no-disclaimers and cc-by-3.0 licenses. Soxred93 | talk count bot 03:58, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Why is it unfree? Is it because of the Wikipedia logo? I made it myself, but added the wiki logo. What license can I use instead, if it is because of the logo? ←Gee♥Alice 04:01, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
I removed the logo. ←Gee♥Alice 04:44, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
That's ok, you can put it back in, as long as you use the license I showed you on your talk page. Soxred93 | talk count bot 17:27, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:1986 LS650 Black.jpg

The fair use rationale is insufficient because a free alternative could be obtained. Triona (talk) 04:29, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:2004 LS650 Silver.jpg

The fair use rationale is insufficient because a free alternative could reasonably be obtained. Triona (talk) 04:30, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:2006 S40 Blue.jpg

The fair use rationale is insufficient because a free alternative could reasonably be obtained. Triona (talk) 04:31, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media 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

[edit] Image:Cracker Jack bag.JPG

clearly a derivative image The Evil Spartan (talk) 12:30, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

It's a scan of a bag, and it says so. Where's the problem? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 12:33, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
A year ago, an ADMIN, which you are not, not only told me (under my old ID) that it was OK, [1] he placed it in the article. [2] Who's right? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 13:02, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Admins aren't infallible or all-knowing, nor is policy permanently set in stone. In this case, the image is clearly a derivative image of copyrighted work. But, if the idea is to illustrate the box design, then it should be licensed as a non-free image with the appropriate fair use rationale attached. Then I think it's fine. --Mosmof (talk) 14:18, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps you could suggest the appropriate wording. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 14:23, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
I'd use {{cover rationale}}, and I think you just have to plug in the name of the article and the copyright owner (see below the template for directions). --Mosmof (talk) 14:38, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Done. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 15:12, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Image kept. Tag changed to fair use, -Nv8200p talk 02:42, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

[edit] Image:RVD_and_Sabu.jpg

Inlight of uploaders other contributions, this is probably a copyvio. Rettetast (talk) 14:24, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Rvdsabu0213.jpg

Inlight of uploaders other contributions, this is probably a copyvio Rettetast (talk) 14:26, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:BWo_in_ECW.jpg

Inlight of uploaders other contributions, this is probably a copyvio Rettetast (talk) 14:26, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Nekromantix3.jpg

Inlight of uploaders other contributions, this is probably a copyvio Rettetast (talk) 14:27, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Transplants3.jpg

Inlight of uploaders other contributions, this is probably a copyvio Rettetast (talk) 14:27, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Xxxhasgold.jpg

Inlight of uploaders other contributions, this is probably a copyvio Rettetast (talk) 14:28, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:WykagylGolfClub.jpg

Image containing digital watermarks indicating corporate ownership of the image's copyright. No evidence that the uploader owns the copyright or has authorization to grant a permission to use the image. --Allen3 talk 15:03, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Fred after pub.jpg

No assertion of authorship on the description page and thus this image us unsourced. As far as that goes, we have no way of knowing if it is authentic and as this is a photo is allegedly depicting a living person in an unflattering situation (stumbling drunk having to be carried), regardless of our copyright policy, this image fails WP:BLP unless it is well-sourced. B (talk) 22:44, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, are you seriously suggesting that someone who was at college with Mercury in 1965 would be bothered by a picture that showed Freddie Mercury helping him walk home?! We are hardly going to give wikipedia a very good image if well meaning people try to upload images from their own personal collection and then a bunch of bureaucrats come along and get rid of the image which they have take the time to scan and upload. The image is high resolution and clearly an amateur photo scanned with an old scanner (due to scan lines). Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 23:05, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
The photo is from the back and there's no possible way of knowing it is him. If you posted a photo that you claimed was me drunk and it wasn't me, I would probably be offended by it. But regardless of that, there is no claim of authorship on this description page. Sure, it might have been uploaded by the photographer, or it might be from a pay website like ancestry.com, from flickr, or any number of places. Sure, it's an amateur photo, but unless we can answer the question of whose photo AND confirm that it's really a photo of the person it's claimed to be, we can't use it. --B (talk) 23:16, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
You know that Freddie Mercury is the person on the right, right? Why would anyone lie about an image with a big scan line across it that doesn't show Mercury's face very well? It seems like someone was just trying to help and by deleting this we are slapping people in the face and at the same time expect others to contribute their personal images? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 01:27, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't see how the image will fail BLP, given that Mercury has been deceased for a while. However, there is a lot of questions surrounding this image. Do we know who the author is, do we know when it was published or where it was published. Unless we know these things, we cannot really have this image at all. I would say delete. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 21:41, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Kravis_wiki.jpg

No evidence image could be released under the GFDL. Nv8200p talk 23:29, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Tomokazu-yoshida.jpg

this image seems to be taken from romotional materials bluemask (talk) 11:06, 26 January 2008 (UTC)