Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2008 April 22
Appearance
April 22
[edit]- Orphaned image, probably unfree. Replaceable by image with a better license. So far as I can determine the Government of Turkey does not release its work into the public domain. Kelly hi! 00:56, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, cannot confirm public domain claim. Kelly hi! 01:27, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Raffy_oquindo (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 01:34, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- UnionRadio (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 01:36, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned Nv8200p talk 01:37, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Sumit_gautam (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 01:39, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- MusiCitizen (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- We shouldn't be using this copyright restricted fair use image when there are public domain pictures with no restrictions known on publication. Damiens.rf 02:37, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Delete -- now obsoleted by found public domain image. Guroadrunner (talk) 06:37, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Per Wikipedia:Image_use_policy#Free_licenses, Licenses which restrict the use of the media to non-profit or educational purposes only (i.e. noncommercial use only), or are given permission to only appear on Wikipedia, are not free enough for Wikipedia's usages or goals and will be deleted. Rockfang (talk) 02:46, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Delete per licensing issue, or recommend trying to negotiate with uploader to have image be put into compatible license. Guroadrunner (talk) 06:27, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Wikifriend (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphaned, probably unfree. Kelly hi! 05:05, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Delete, per nom. Guroadrunner (talk) 06:26, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Igneouspetroclass (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphaned. Sdrtirs (talk) 05:11, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Guroadrunner (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Low quality Kelly hi! 05:15, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Fixed orphan issue. Put in Talk:Philippe Alliot. Low quality, yes, was to replace "no image" issue. Guroadrunner (talk) 06:25, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Image kept -Nv8200p talk 02:11, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned. Sdrtirs (talk) 05:18, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned. Sdrtirs (talk) 05:22, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Fixed orphan issue. A decision should be made on the use of Image:Furnacebrazingsmall.png versus Image:Furnacebrazing.png Guroadrunner (talk) 06:34, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- [ notify] | contribs). - uploaded by [[User talk:#Image:Coarsegrainedpyroxenite.JPG listed for deletion|]] (
- duplicate image same aothor Igneouspetroclass (talk) 05:25, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, obsoleted by Commons image Image:Flag of Alsace.svg. Kelly hi! 05:37, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, probably unfree. Kelly hi! 06:55, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Maximus_Rex (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- DISTURBING IMAGE - dead source, orphaned, can't confirm PD status. Kelly hi! 07:36, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - Dead URL for sourcing, yes, but I would hold in good faith that it came from the CDC, a government agency whose work is PD. True, it is orphaned. Guroadrunner (talk) 11:42, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Nickcoates (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphaned UE image of uploader. Ricky81682 (talk) 09:58, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Comment - recommend adding Image:Nicholas_Coates.JPG Guroadrunner (talk) 11:44, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- * Doesn't have a license, so will be deleted for that reason. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 21:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Copyright violation Kelly hi! 13:06, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Comment - potentially encyclopedic for Criticism of Wikipedia. Not sure of claim of copyright violation. Guroadrunner (talk) 01:51, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- Since before Wikipedia was created, copyright just about anywhere in the world has started when the document was created, without registration or publishing. So it is copyrighted. A claim of fair use could be made, but isn't.--Prosfilaes (talk) 16:40, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
- Not a JPG, unfree file format, Orphaned, Absent uploader MER-C 13:07, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Spam, Orphaned, Absent uploader MER-C 13:08, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Spam, Orphaned, Absent uploader MER-C 13:09, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Cmarston1929 (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Original research, Orphaned, Absent uploader MER-C 13:11, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader, Low quality MER-C 13:17, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Obsolete Kelly hi! 13:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Guy_Campbell (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphaned, Copyright violation Kelly hi! 13:27, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Unsourced BLP, vanispamcruftisement, Orphaned, Absent uploader MER-C 13:32, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Somebody_in_the_WWW (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphaned, likely unfree. Kelly hi! 13:42, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Obsolete Kelly hi! 13:51, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- OttomanReference (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphaned, no good source to determine copyright status. Kelly hi! 14:24, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, likely unfree. Kelly hi! 14:41, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- According to the site's terms of use, noncommercial use only permitted. Kelly hi! 14:55, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Delete - evaluation of license terms is correct, is incompatible. Guroadrunner (talk) 01:49, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned redundant map. Kelly hi! 15:34, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Keep. No longer orphaned. This map is superior to the one in place, so I put it in Auckland. Guroadrunner (talk) 02:13, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- Image kept -Nv8200p talk 02:12, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, obsoleted by PNG version. Kelly hi! 16:01, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, possibly unfree. Kelly hi! 16:08, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned map, possibly unfree - no evidence of PD at given URL. Kelly hi! 16:23, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, possibly unfree - given source has no license for images. Source site shows copyright notice. Kelly hi! 16:24, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Secretsqurl (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- This image is not being used by any article. Also, there is no information about the copyright owner. Damiens.rf 16:40, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- ChrisBunker (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Used only in attack pages on the subject. Orphaned, unencyclopedic. Redfarmer (talk) 17:32, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- ChrisBunker (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Used only in attack page on subject. Orphaned, unencyclopedic, likely copyright vio. Redfarmer (talk) 17:33, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- ChrisBunker (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Used only in attack pages on subject. Orphaned, unencyclopedic. Redfarmer (talk) 17:35, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Very poor quality, jagged image. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 17:42, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - in this case, the low quality is a benefit for non-free fair use rationale of an album cover. Guroadrunner (talk) 13:23, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
- Image deleted. Image was unreadable. Resolution does not have to be that low to comply with Wikipedia policy. -Nv8200p talk 02:15, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- This image is not a work of the Ukrainian government, but a copyrighted derivative work from this website, based on the original government design. Same file format, same file size, it's scraped from that site. Kelly hi! 18:49, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Keep. The site does not acquire a copyright of a PD by law image by merely reproducing it no matter how a skillful reproduction is. Exact copying does not generate a copyright per Bridgeman case. --Irpen 18:51, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Can you point to the original source that this website took the image from? It seems to me significant creativity has gone into the design, particularly in the attempted reproduction of the texture, etc. In any event, this could be replaced by an unencumbered image from a Wikipedian or a Ukrainian government source. Kelly hi! 18:55, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- "Significant creativity" is a matter of opinion. The courts asserted that the concept of the copyright lies in originality (read the Bridgeman case if you will.) There is nothing original here as the design of the shoulderboard is defined by the Ukrainian in every minute detail. --Irpen 19:00, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Why use images encumbered by copyright claims when free images are available? For example, see Image:Ukraine Admiral shoulderboard.svg, a very similar image which is totally free because it was made by a Wikipedian. Kelly hi! 19:03, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- How is it encumbered? If someones places an image of the Leonardo's painting at the personal web-site and puts "All rights reserved" in the bottom of the page, does the image become "encumbered by copyright claims"? Suppose the image would happen to be an exact file used by WP. Should we run to delete it an look for another copy? Invalid claims bear no meaning. --Irpen 19:09, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- No, because such a claim would clearly be invalid unless it was modified with enough creativity to create a new copyright. Kelly hi! 19:25, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- What's "enough"? The copyright concept rests on originality. The copy remains a copy no matter how it is done, in the xerox, photoshop, fax, etc. If the portrait is reproduced from an alternative view (artists vision on how the subject looks from a different angle, different clothing, different lightin), then yes, it is original. If it is a faithful reproduction, it remains a copy. The image lacks originality just like the Ukrainian flag that some put on their web-sites. --Irpen 21:53, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Image kept per Bridgeman case. -Nv8200p talk 02:22, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- What's "enough"? The copyright concept rests on originality. The copy remains a copy no matter how it is done, in the xerox, photoshop, fax, etc. If the portrait is reproduced from an alternative view (artists vision on how the subject looks from a different angle, different clothing, different lightin), then yes, it is original. If it is a faithful reproduction, it remains a copy. The image lacks originality just like the Ukrainian flag that some put on their web-sites. --Irpen 21:53, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- No, because such a claim would clearly be invalid unless it was modified with enough creativity to create a new copyright. Kelly hi! 19:25, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- How is it encumbered? If someones places an image of the Leonardo's painting at the personal web-site and puts "All rights reserved" in the bottom of the page, does the image become "encumbered by copyright claims"? Suppose the image would happen to be an exact file used by WP. Should we run to delete it an look for another copy? Invalid claims bear no meaning. --Irpen 19:09, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Why use images encumbered by copyright claims when free images are available? For example, see Image:Ukraine Admiral shoulderboard.svg, a very similar image which is totally free because it was made by a Wikipedian. Kelly hi! 19:03, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- "Significant creativity" is a matter of opinion. The courts asserted that the concept of the copyright lies in originality (read the Bridgeman case if you will.) There is nothing original here as the design of the shoulderboard is defined by the Ukrainian in every minute detail. --Irpen 19:00, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Can you point to the original source that this website took the image from? It seems to me significant creativity has gone into the design, particularly in the attempted reproduction of the texture, etc. In any event, this could be replaced by an unencumbered image from a Wikipedian or a Ukrainian government source. Kelly hi! 18:55, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Keep. The site does not acquire a copyright of a PD by law image by merely reproducing it no matter how a skillful reproduction is. Exact copying does not generate a copyright per Bridgeman case. --Irpen 18:51, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Deleted. Although there is a "keep" here, on reviewing the image, the argument for speedy deletion, and other blatantly vandalistic edits by the creator, I have speedily deleted this as vandalism. BLP concerns over-ride other considerations.I'm not familiar with the overall picture, but I wonder why the creator has not been blocked as a blatant vandal. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 21:25, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- Defamatory image of Murray Gold. ~~ [Jam][talk] 20:58, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Comment: I've nominated it for CSD G10 as per my other nomination below. ~~ [Jam][talk] 21:12, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - in this case, this is not a defamatory image, but a silly one. I have placed on his page to fix a "replace this image male" problem. Guroadrunner (talk) 02:06, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- Delete. Silliness and defamation are not mutually exclusive — this image is both, and in addition is patently unencyclopedic. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 04:48, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- Defamatory image of Murray Gold (and, I believe, Keff McCulloch). ~~ [Jam][talk] 21:01, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Delete as above — defamatory and unencyclopedic. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 04:51, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- Comment - I just speedy-deleted it per WP:CSD#G10 as it was used in BLP vandalism - Alison ❤ 21:02, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- ChrisBunker (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Unencyclopedic, orphaned image uploaded by indef banned user for his user page which may have been a part of an attack user page previous to blocking admin replacing it with a block template.[1] Redfarmer (talk) 21:06, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- OniDarkLink (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Unencyclopedic, orphaned, used only in an attack page created by the user. Redfarmer (talk) 21:07, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Nothing444 (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphaned PD image. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 22:28, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, probably unfree (generated by esri.com) Kelly hi! 23:20, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- It's the opposite of unfree, it's public domain. I generated the image, not esri.com. The raw data, which was generated by the US government and is PD-USGov, is available for download at esri.com. Anthony (talk) 12:07, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
- also no longer orphaned Anthony (talk) 12:10, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
- Image kept -Nv8200p talk 02:17, 7 May 2008 (UTC)