Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images/2008 March 15

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< March 14 March 16 >

Contents

[edit] March 15

[edit] Image:1 Slash Puppet band pic color sofa const fixsharp.jpg

Promotional photogragh of a band, no evidence the uploader owns copyright. Polly (Parrot) 00:10, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Anthony J. Mifsud headshot fix.jpg

Promotional photogragh, no evidence the uploader holds copyright. Polly (Parrot) 00:17, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Doctor Dre .jpg

no evidence that Logan Ohnmeis is uploader Genisock2 (talk) 00:26, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Wisebeardman.JPG

Obviously a screenshot from Mark Bunker post on YouTube, needs verification w/ OTRS or something, and thus the free-use claim is misleading. Cirt (talk) 00:30, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Thenewman2.JPG

No source given for this image, and especially in a WP:BLP would be better off with verification from OTRS for this, as well as some additional info about the image and that it really is depicting this particular individual. Cirt (talk) 00:36, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Do you have any reason not to assume good faith by User:Triangular who says that he/she is the author of the work (and therefore the source) and licenses it under CC 2.5? Speculation that the image isn't Ron Newman is .. speculation. Take this old picture and dump a bunch of years on top of it, and I don't see any reason to doubt it. AndroidCat (talk) 19:14, 17 March 2008 (UTC) Also see the original-sized version Image:Thenewman.JPG which has all of the camera metadata. (The copyright 2002 is from the camera firmware.) AndroidCat (talk) 16:27, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
I just think that the best solution for an image with questionable verification, especially in a WP:BLP, would be to move the image to Wikimedia Commons, delete this version here, and have the image creator email WP:OTRS. Cirt (talk) 00:39, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
You still haven't said what is questionable about the verification. AndroidCat (talk) 01:14, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
I am not really sure, I just think that it would be best to have verification through OTRS. But I will defer to the results of this discussion. Cirt (talk) 02:19, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Objection. You have said nothing disputing whether this image is free. Thus this is not the forum for any discussion. -Nard 02:37, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I took this picture. It's definitely Ron Newman. I took it at the Hatch Shell in Boston at a concert there a few years ago, at which he was a spectator. It's definitely free, and definitely Ron Newman. Similar to what was said earlier, shouldn't it only be suspected to be unfree (or not actually be a photo depicting Ron Newman) if someone comes forward claiming that it's copyrighted or that it's someone else? Also, look at the photo again. It's not likely to be copyrighted, because it's really a pretty crappy photo! Triangular (talk) 23:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Katy Garbi plaque.JPG

Image from a website, no evidence the uploader holds the copyright. Polly (Parrot) 01:21, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Einst_3.jpg

There is no eveidence of permission to use under the GFDL and image is not used n the article name space. Nv8200p talk 02:17, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Elena_Korikova.jpg

Pro head shot I'm willing to bet the uploader did not take. Nv8200p talk 02:59, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Elisastayvideoo.jpg

Screenshot of a music video. Uploader is most likely not copyright holder as claimed. Nv8200p talk 03:10, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:ReneReinumagi.jpg

This is apparently a copy of this photo which, according to its context is a photo by Ergo Kuld and not free but a copyrighted work. Also note the uploader has also uploaded this television screenshot claiming it is his/her own work. Mats Halldin (talk) 07:36, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Iealogo.gif

uploader is not copyright holder Rettetast (talk) 16:08, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Iguanalarcomuseum.jpg

no evidence of GFDL. Rettetast (talk) 16:16, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Ii_Naomasa's_Armor.PNG

no evidence of GFDL. Rettetast (talk) 16:17, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Ikeawgu.jpg

no evidence of GFDL. Rettetast (talk) 16:19, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Illuminating_technologies.gif

no evidence of GFDL. Rettetast (talk) 16:22, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Illyrian_helmet.jpg

no evidence of GFDL. Rettetast (talk) 16:23, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Image_of_umar_alisha_sahiti_samithi_anniversary_celebrations_1999.jpg

no evidence of free license in the source. Rettetast (talk) 16:25, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Ember_Swift_2006_1.jpg

No evidence uploader has permission to release the image under the GFDL. Nv8200p talk 17:52, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Catedral de México's regulator lines.jpg

This is not a book cover as it says, but a book page, as it also says, and even it if was a book cover, the fair use would be for illustrating the book, not for illustrating an article on the golden ratio. Dicklyon (talk) 17:54, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, when you upload a new image, first you get a lost of licence types, all good. I pick the link that says "Books Covers or other" pages ant it takes you to a page in which you have to choose the license again (making the previous page a practical waste of time), but now, in this page, they don't show you an option for pages. I uploaded 2 images that are big part of the book pages and 1 that is just half. What's the correct tag? --20-dude (talk) 00:13, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

As far as I know, there's no tag that will let you use copies of figures from copyrighted book pages, under "fair use", to illustrate your article. Have you studied the allowable fair use rationales? They're pretty restrictive. Dicklyon (talk) 04:31, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Is there a policy regarding images from pages? there must be. That's how wikipedia gets to have pictures from magazines and comics. --20-dude (talk) 23:42, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Find one and look at it as an example. I'm unclear on what magazines and comics you refer to; wikipedia only wants images that are freely available for unrestricted use, and in limited situations some fair use of copyrighted images (see Wikipedia:Non-free content). Dicklyon (talk) 03:46, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:EmmaKoelherPortrait.JPG

No evidence that the image was granted to use the image under the GFDL. Nv8200p talk 18:44, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:SRK in Don - The Chase Begins Again.jpg

This seems to be a wallpaper with a false license.. Anshuk (talk) 20:39, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Colemanhawkins1.jpg

Read the summary, says it all really. Polly (Parrot) 21:14, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

This image is from here, but I do not know what license is used on website. Carlosguitar (ready and willing) 23:14, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:YashandGauri.jpg

looks like a promo photo, no evidence the CC license is correct. Polly (Parrot) 21:18, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Yashpal ghai.jpg

Looks like an image taken from a website, no evidence the CC license is correct. Polly (Parrot) 21:20, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Yashpalcricket.jpg

Looks like an image taken from a website, no evidence the CC license is correct. Polly (Parrot) 21:21, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Yashjohar.jpg

Looks like an image taken from a website, no evidence the CC license is correct. Polly (Parrot) 21:21, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Yashchopra.jpg

Looks like an image taken from a website, no evidence the CC license is correct. Polly (Parrot) 21:22, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:EnvelopeSirErnestdeSilva.jpg

I don't think the uploader can be the copyright holder of this image as claimed. Nv8200p talk 21:22, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Yashpal Sharma.jpg

Looks like an image taken from a website, no evidence the CC license is correct. Polly (Parrot) 21:22, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Windows Movie Maker 2.jpg

Screenshot of copyrighted software, not public domain. Polly (Parrot) 22:16, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't care about this. It can be deleted. Kodster (Talk) 22:23, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Just delete it anyway, we have pics of it already, and even worse, that's not how you do a screenshot XD ViperSnake151 22:41, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Movie maker 2.jpg

Screenshot of copyrighted software, not public domain. Polly (Parrot) 22:17, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't care about this. It can be deleted. Kodster (Talk) 22:23, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Post-it note.jpg

photo of copyrighted logo, not public domain. Polly (Parrot) 22:19, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Um...what? It's a picture of a post-it note package! I can't take a picture of it because it has the logo??? I don't mean to be disrespectful, I know you're trying to do your job, but how can this picture be unfree? Kodster (Talk)