Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2012 May 8

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Delete; deleted as F9 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:01, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kajol -277x280.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Delete: numerous different versions, from headshot to full length portrait, of this photo are found by tineye, so it appear the uploader is making a false claim of copyright and authorship. ww2censor (talk) 00:49, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Delete; deleted as F4 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:11, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kagaminelen.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• I'm not convinced that the licence claim ("Likeness of Kagamine Len is Licensed for free use by Crypton Future Media to anyone purchasing the Rin/Len edition of the Vocaloid 2 software package.") is correct. Software screenshots are normally not free to use for any purpose if you buy some commercial software. Stefan2 (talk) 11:54, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - even if that could be confirmed, would it still not be free enough for use on Wikipedia as that license would be personal only to those individuals?--ukexpat (talk) 18:27, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have not seen the licence you are talking about, so I don't know what it says. Is the licence available on the Internet somewhere? If non-free, the file currently fails WP:NFCC#7 (not used in the article namespace) and WP:NFCC#9 (use outside the article namespace). --Stefan2 (talk) 19:02, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:15, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Parthi thiru.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Demotix photo ID 1135293 is given, but that doesn't match the image here. Additionally, the site does not appear to release its images to the public domain as claimed by the uploader. (ESkog)^(Talk) 11:56, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:15, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ken Howard (composer) photo.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Also here and here. Uploader's username is similar to the name of the person on the photo so it could be fine, but we would need OTRS here. See also Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Photo Ken Howard (composer).jpg. Stefan2 (talk) 12:09, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:15, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pj quick.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• The licence statement, "Request Permission for Single Screenshot of Music Video, for Wikipedia Use. Permission granted", sounds unfree. Stefan2 (talk) 12:21, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't pull this down in the absence of any complaint and while we work to determine the proper terminology for its use. It's a screenshot from an online music video. Permission was granted to use it on Wikipedia, as expressed above. I don't know if that means "free" or "unfree" per picture guidelines, but it does mean it's used here by permission. Permission was secured out of caution and courtesy, but I think I saw a fair use rationale for online video screenshots as well, so if there's some defect with the way I classified it above, that might be an alternate way to do it. Colton Cosmic (talk) 12:56, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:15, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Goode.walk.of.fame.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• No FOP in USA. The griffon looks complex. Seems to be from 1990 according to Grossmont College#Walk of Fame. Stefan2 (talk) 14:23, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:15, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vilasrao Deshmukh.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• The original image in the file's history is not the uploader's own work, it's cropped from this image (website), I doubt the second upload it was overwritten with by the same uploader is their own work either (uploader has had previous images deleted per CSD F9 or here at PUF). 17:12, 8 May 2012 (UTC) January (talk) 17:12, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:04, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:ArtScene.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Magazine covers Presidentman talk · contribs Random Picture of the Day (Talkback) 21:50, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file 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 discussion was: keep. Given the response both here and on Facebook, I see little reason to not believe that these images are not owned by uploader. WP:OTRS would also be a good idea just to avoid issues from cropping up in the future. — ξ^xplicit 00:58, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:David Wenzel at That's Entertainment for FCBD 2012-05-05.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:David Wenzel at That's Entertainment for FCBD 2012.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Claimed to be own work, but also sourced to Facebook. Facebook sources the upload to something which looks like a company name: "That's Entertainmentさんの写真" meaning "Mr That's Entertainment's photos". This looks very much like a company profile. Stefan2 (talk) 23:00, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am an administrator of the That's Entertainment facebook page, and also added some of the same photos of David Wenzel to Wikipedia.Artofmine (talk) 00:09, 10 May 2012 (UTC) I would appreciate your help. Can I do something here or on facebook that will bring the images into compliance?Artofmine (talk) 00:13, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It would be nice if the Facebook page could indicate that the Wikipedia upload was approved by the Facebook user. --Stefan2 (talk) 12:15, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have just done as you suggested: http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10150837021849730.428120.46993884729&type=1 I appreciate your help and patience.Artofmine (talk) 00:47, 12 May 2012 (UTC) To be clear, I have taken these photos, and provided them to both venues.Artofmine (talk) 00:49, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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