Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2008 June 27
Appearance
(Redirected from Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2008 June 27)
June 27
[edit]- The HeartStealer Kid (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphan, copyvio. Screenshot of a television program. BlueAzure (talk) 01:49, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete - Grainy picture, probably copyvio. Yamakiri TC $4$6$7§ 07-1-2008 • 18:15:22
- Delete Copyvio, orphaned — BQZip01 — talk 04:41, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- The HeartStealer Kid (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphan, copyvio. Screenshot of a television program. BlueAzure (talk) 01:50, 27 June 2008 /(UTC)
- Delete Orphaned copyvio. Yamakiri TC $4$6$7§ 07-1-2008 • 18:16:11
- Delete Copyvio, orphaned — BQZip01 — talk 04:42, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Manandharg (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Copyvio, lyrics to multiple songs. BlueAzure (talk) 01:54, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Songs are in a foreign language, not useful. Yamakiri TC $4$6$7§ 07-1-2008 • 18:17:56
- Delete Unnecessary. Lyrics can be typed instead and be better formatted to be useful in WP, if needed. This is such an extreme aspect ratio it cannot be read without significantly zooming in. — BQZip01 — talk 04:44, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Orphan, photo of a person who does not have an article. BlueAzure (talk) 01:58, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Grainy orphaned picture, probably a friend of the uploader. Yamakiri TC $4$6$7§ 07-1-2008 • 18:20:32
- Delete Content not usable for an encyclopedia (at least not in any context I can see from its description). — BQZip01 — talk 04:46, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Michael Locke (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphan, photo of a person who does not have an article. BlueAzure (talk) 01:58, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Improperly labeled orphaned photo of the user, which looks to be advertising in the upload summary. Yamakiri TC $4$6$7§ 07-1-2008 • 18:21:59
- Delete Content not usable for an encyclopedia (no article). If needed, the image can be restored. — BQZip01 — talk 04:48, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Orphan, photo of a person who does not have an article. BlueAzure (talk) 01:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Pavelenator (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphan, photo of a musician who does not have an article. BlueAzure (talk) 02:00, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Goosefella (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphan, photo of a person who does not have an article. BlueAzure (talk) 02:01, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Orphan, the article associated with this image was deleted. BlueAzure (talk) 02:02, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Orphaned picture with a horrible title Yamakiri TC $4$6$7§ 07-1-2008 • 18:23:28
- Orphan, the article associated with this image was deleted. BlueAzure (talk) 02:02, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Orphan, the article associated with this image was deleted. BlueAzure (talk) 02:03, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Nycboi4eva (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphan, photo of a person who does not have an article. BlueAzure (talk) 02:04, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Infiltrata (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphan, photo of a musician who does not have an article. BlueAzure (talk) 02:06, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- [ notify] | contribs). - uploaded by [[User talk:#Image:Jimmy1.jpg listed for deletion|]] (
- Orphan, the article associated with this image was deleted. BlueAzure (talk) 02:08, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Jamesritala (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphan, the article associated with this image was deleted. BlueAzure (talk) 02:13, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Jamesritala (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphan, the article associated with this image was deleted. BlueAzure (talk) 02:14, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Jamesritala (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphan, the article associated with this image was deleted. BlueAzure (talk) 02:15, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Acfreeborn (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphan, the article associated with this image was deleted. BlueAzure (talk) 02:16, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Kimchanpongco (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphan, the article associated with this image was deleted. BlueAzure (talk) 02:18, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Copyrighted picture of a (still) living Australian (or YAAJI: Yet Another Australian Judge image). Damiens.rf 02:56, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Very strong keep - as has been explained a million times, it is practically impossible to take a photo of an Australian judge, especially one at this level. By convention (that is, unwritten norm, for which there is no source, but since I am familiar with the Australian practice you can take my and other Australians' word for it, it is true - if you want side evidence you can testify to the lack of even copyrighted photos on photo websites, such as Flickr and the like - there are simply no photos of this judge) they DO NOT APPEAR IN PUBLIC except by official invitations where photos are not usually allowed and in the court room, and by law by law it is illegal to take photos or cameras in court. Comparisons with Justice Michael Kirby are invalid, because that judge is a distinct exception to the above rule due to the human rights work he took on before he came on the bench and which he continues to do. I ask the closing moderator not to import American conventions onto Australian judges - the situations are markedly different and the situation I have described should be evaluated on its own merits and not according to conventions that do not apply to the Australian situation. This photo was provided in good faith to show an image of the judge in full compliance with fair use provisions under Australian copyright law - for the use of research as Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and in good knowledge that we are simply not going to get an image of the judge any other way, and we are without a method to improve this page without one. We have tried other methods such as contacting the court, and they will not provide such images (although being happy for this to be published here for research and study purposes). I will also note that this image is no longer available on the internet and will prevent it being seen if it is to be deleted. I ask that this not be deleted due to the combination of the above reasons - the fair use rationale is clear enough on this reason and can be amended to make any of my reasoning clearer if that is required. JRG (talk) 13:25, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Plain wrong, as shown by dozen previous IFD results. By the way, no matter how much you CAPITALIZE YOUR ARGUMENT, Judge Anthony Mason, unlike Mullah Mohammed Omar, does appears in public. Now let's stop being lazy and pick up our cameras. --Damiens.rf 17:31, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- They are OFFICIAL invitiational events where the public is not allowed and they are official media photographs. You can't just walk in and take pictures of these people. Please stop it. JRG (talk) 05:34, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
- Copyrighted picture of a living man (Australian Judge) Damiens.rf 02:57, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Very strong keep - as has been explained a million times, it is practically impossible to take a photo of an Australian judge, especially one at this level. By convention (that is, unwritten norm, for which there is no source, but since I am familiar with the Australian practice you can take my and other Australians' word for it, it is true - if you want side evidence you can testify to the lack of even copyrighted photos on photo websites, such as Flickr and the like - there are simply no photos of this judge) they DO NOT APPEAR IN PUBLIC except by official invitations where photos are not usually allowed and in the court room, and by law by law it is illegal to take photos or cameras in court. Comparisons with Justice Michael Kirby are invalid, because that judge is a distinct exception to the above rule due to the human rights work he took on before he came on the bench and which he continues to do. I ask the closing moderator not to import American conventions onto Australian judges - the situations are markedly different and the situation I have described should be evaluated on its own merits and not according to conventions that do not apply to the Australian situation. This photo was provided in good faith to show an image of the judge in full compliance with fair use provisions under Australian copyright law - for the use of research as Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and in good knowledge that we are simply not going to get an image of the judge any other way, and we are without a method to improve this page without one. We have tried other methods such as contacting the court, and they will not provide such images (although being happy for this to be published here for research and study purposes). I will also note that this image is no longer available on the internet and will prevent it being seen if it is to be deleted. I ask that this not be deleted due to the combination of the above reasons - the fair use rationale is clear enough on this reason and can be amended to make any of my reasoning clearer if that is required. JRG (talk) 13:25, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Lengthy but empty argument. The guy is not hiding on Bin Laden's cave . --Damiens.rf 17:39, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- They are OFFICIAL photographs of events, invitiational ones. No public. No photographs for the average person. Get it right. JRG (talk) 05:38, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
- Yet another copyrighted picture of a living Australian Judge. Damiens.rf 02:57, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Very strong keep - as has been explained a million times, it is practically impossible to take a photo of an Australian judge, especially one at this level. By convention (that is, unwritten norm, for which there is no source, but since I am familiar with the Australian practice you can take my and other Australians' word for it, it is true - if you want side evidence you can testify to the lack of even copyrighted photos on photo websites, such as Flickr and the like - there are simply no photos of this judge) they DO NOT APPEAR IN PUBLIC except by official invitations where photos are not usually allowed and in the court room, and by law by law it is illegal to take photos or cameras in court. Comparisons with Justice Michael Kirby are invalid, because that judge is a distinct exception to the above rule due to the human rights work he took on before he came on the bench and which he continues to do. I ask the closing moderator not to import American conventions onto Australian judges - the situations are markedly different and the situation I have described should be evaluated on its own merits and not according to conventions that do not apply to the Australian situation. This photo was provided in good faith to show an image of the judge in full compliance with fair use provisions under Australian copyright law - for the use of research as Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and in good knowledge that we are simply not going to get an image of the judge any other way, and we are without a method to improve this page without one. We have tried other methods such as contacting the court, and they will not provide such images (although being happy for this to be published here for research and study purposes). I will also note that this image is no longer available on the internet and will prevent it being seen if it is to be deleted. I ask that this not be deleted due to the combination of the above reasons - the fair use rationale is clear enough on this reason and can be amended to make any of my reasoning clearer if that is required. JRG (talk) 13:26, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Guess what? He's not a vampire and does appears in public sometimes. (with some luck, you can even spot him hanging around with his best friend, Michael Kirby). Pick up your camera. --Damiens.rf 17:47, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Again, they are official invitational visits and they are official photographs. You can't just take a camera and go and photograph them. For an average person it is practically impossible. Please get it right. JRG (talk) 05:35, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
- A Living man, but a copyrighted image. Damiens.rf 03:00, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Very strong keep - as has been explained a million times, it is practically impossible to take a photo of an Australian judge, especially one at this level. Living man he may be, but there must be exceptions for judges who do not appear in public. By convention (that is, unwritten norm, for which there is no source, but since I am familiar with the Australian practice you can take my and other Australians' word for it, it is true - if you want side evidence you can testify to the lack of even copyrighted photos on photo websites, such as Flickr and the like - there are simply no photos of this judge) they DO NOT APPEAR IN PUBLIC except by official invitations where photos are not usually allowed and in the court room, and by law by law it is illegal to take photos or cameras in court. Comparisons with Justice Michael Kirby are invalid, because that judge is a distinct exception to the above rule due to the human rights work he took on before he came on the bench and which he continues to do. I ask the closing moderator not to import American conventions onto Australian judges - the situations are markedly different and the situation I have described should be evaluated on its own merits and not according to conventions that do not apply to the Australian situation. This photo was provided in good faith to show an image of the judge in full compliance with fair use provisions under Australian copyright law - for the use of research as Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and in good knowledge that we are simply not going to get an image of the judge any other way, and we are without a method to improve this page without one. We have tried other methods such as contacting the court, and they will not provide such images (although being happy for this to be published here for research and study purposes). I will also note that this image is no longer available on the internet and will prevent it being seen if it is to be deleted. I ask that this not be deleted due to the combination of the above reasons - the fair use rationale is clear enough on this reason and can be amended to make any of my reasoning clearer if that is required. JRG (talk) 13:27, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- A Living Australian. Damiens.rf 03:00, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Very strong keep - as has been explained a million times, it is practically impossible to take a photo of an Australian judge, especially one at this level. By convention (that is, unwritten norm, for which there is no source, but since I am familiar with the Australian practice you can take my and other Australians' word for it, it is true - if you want side evidence you can testify to the lack of even copyrighted photos on photo websites, such as Flickr and the like - there are simply no photos of this judge) they DO NOT APPEAR IN PUBLIC except by official invitations where photos are not usually allowed and in the court room, and by law by law it is illegal to take photos or cameras in court. Comparisons with Justice Michael Kirby are invalid, because that judge is a distinct exception to the above rule due to the human rights work he took on before he came on the bench and which he continues to do. I ask the closing moderator not to import American conventions onto Australian judges - the situations are markedly different and the situation I have described should be evaluated on its own merits and not according to conventions that do not apply to the Australian situation. This photo was provided in good faith to show an image of the judge in full compliance with fair use provisions under Australian copyright law - for the use of research as Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and in good knowledge that we are simply not going to get an image of the judge any other way, and we are without a method to improve this page without one. We have tried other methods such as contacting the court, and they will not provide such images (although being happy for this to be published here for research and study purposes). I will also note that this image is no longer available on the internet and will prevent it being seen if it is to be deleted. I ask that this not be deleted due to the combination of the above reasons - the fair use rationale is clear enough on this reason and can be amended to make any of my reasoning clearer if that is required. JRG (talk) 13:27, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- The man is alive, the image is copyrighted. Damiens.rf 03:01, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Very strong keep - as has been explained a million times, it is practically impossible to take a photo of an Australian judge, especially one at this level. By convention (that is, unwritten norm, for which there is no source, but since I am familiar with the Australian practice you can take my and other Australians' word for it, it is true - if you want side evidence you can testify to the lack of even copyrighted photos on photo websites, such as Flickr and the like - there are simply no photos of this judge) they DO NOT APPEAR IN PUBLIC except by official invitations where photos are not usually allowed and in the court room, and by law by law it is illegal to take photos or cameras in court. Comparisons with Justice Michael Kirby are invalid, because that judge is a distinct exception to the above rule due to the human rights work he took on before he came on the bench and which he continues to do. I ask the closing moderator not to import American conventions onto Australian judges - the situations are markedly different and the situation I have described should be evaluated on its own merits and not according to conventions that do not apply to the Australian situation. This photo was provided in good faith to show an image of the judge in full compliance with fair use provisions under Australian copyright law - for the use of research as Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and in good knowledge that we are simply not going to get an image of the judge any other way, and we are without a method to improve this page without one. We have tried other methods such as contacting the court, and they will not provide such images (although being happy for this to be published here for research and study purposes). I will also note that this image is no longer available on the internet and will prevent it being seen if it is to be deleted. I ask that this not be deleted due to the combination of the above reasons - the fair use rationale is clear enough on this reason and can be amended to make any of my reasoning clearer if that is required. JRG (talk) 13:28, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Living woman, copyrighted image. Damiens.rf 03:01, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Very strong keep - as has been explained a million times, it is practically impossible to take a photo of an Australian judge, especially one at this level and especially a sitting judge. By convention (that is, unwritten norm, for which there is no source, but since I am familiar with the Australian practice you can take my and other Australians' word for it, it is true - if you want side evidence you can testify to the lack of even copyrighted photos on photo websites, such as Flickr and the like - there are simply no photos of this judge apart from one image on Flickr which was copied from a media source) they DO NOT APPEAR IN PUBLIC except by official invitations where photos are not usually allowed and in the court room, and by law by law it is illegal to take photos or cameras in court. Comparisons with Justice Michael Kirby are invalid, because that judge is a distinct exception to the above rule due to the human rights work he took on before he came on the bench and which he continues to do. I ask the closing moderator not to import American conventions onto Australian judges - the situations are markedly different and the situation I have described should be evaluated on its own merits and not according to conventions that do not apply to the Australian situation. This photo was provided in good faith to show an image of the judge in full compliance with fair use provisions under Australian copyright law - for the use of research as Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and in good knowledge that we are simply not going to get an image of the judge any other way, and we are without a method to improve this page without one. We have tried other methods such as contacting the court, and they will not provide such images (although being happy for this to be published here for research and study purposes). I ask that this not be deleted due to the combination of the above reasons - the fair use rationale is clear enough on this reason but can be amended to make any of my reasoning clearer if that is required. JRG (talk) 13:30, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- One more picture of a living Australian woman. Damiens.rf 03:02, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Very strong keep - as has been explained a million times, it is practically impossible to take a photo of an Australian judge, especially a sitting judge at this level. By convention (that is, unwritten norm, for which there is no source, but since I am familiar with the Australian practice you can take my and other Australians' word for it, it is true - if you want side evidence you can testify to the lack of even copyrighted photos on photo websites, such as Flickr and the like - there are simply no photos of this judge) they DO NOT APPEAR IN PUBLIC except by official invitations where photos are not usually allowed and in the court room, and by law by law it is illegal to take photos or cameras in court. Comparisons with Justice Michael Kirby are invalid, because that judge is a distinct exception to the above rule due to the human rights work he took on before he came on the bench and which he continues to do. I ask the closing moderator not to import American conventions onto Australian judges - the situations are markedly different and the situation I have described should be evaluated on its own merits and not according to conventions that do not apply to the Australian situation. This photo was provided in good faith to show an image of the judge in full compliance with fair use provisions under Australian copyright law - for the use of research as Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and in good knowledge that we are simply not going to get an image of the judge any other way, and we are without a method to improve this page without one. We have tried other methods such as contacting the court, and they will not provide such images (although being happy for this to be published here for research and study purposes). I ask that this not be deleted due to the combination of the above reasons - the fair use rationale is clear enough on this reason and can be amended to make any of my reasoning clearer if that is required. JRG (talk) 13:31, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Copyrighted picture of a living Australian. Damiens.rf 03:05, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Very strong keep - as has been explained a million times, it is practically impossible to take a photo of an Australian judge, especially one at this level. By convention (that is, unwritten norm, for which there is no source, but since I am familiar with the Australian practice you can take my and other Australians' word for it, it is true - if you want side evidence you can testify to the lack of even copyrighted photos on photo websites, such as Flickr and the like - there are simply no photos of this judge) they DO NOT APPEAR IN PUBLIC except by official invitations where photos are not usually allowed and in the court room, and by law by law it is illegal to take photos or cameras in court. Comparisons with Justice Michael Kirby are invalid, because that judge is a distinct exception to the above rule due to the human rights work he took on before he came on the bench and which he continues to do. I ask the closing moderator not to import American conventions onto Australian judges - the situations are markedly different and the situation I have described should be evaluated on its own merits and not according to conventions that do not apply to the Australian situation. This photo was provided in good faith to show an image of the judge in full compliance with fair use provisions under Australian copyright law - for the use of research as Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and in good knowledge that we are simply not going to get an image of the judge any other way, and we are without a method to improve this page without one. We have tried other methods such as contacting the court, and they will not provide such images (although being happy for this to be published here for research and study purposes). I will also note that this image is no longer available on the internet and will prevent it being seen if it is to be deleted. I ask that this not be deleted due to the combination of the above reasons - the fair use rationale is clear enough on this reason and can be amended to make any of my reasoning clearer if that is required. JRG (talk) 13:28, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Copyrighted picture of a living Australian. Damiens.rf 03:05, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Very strong keep - as has been explained a million times, it is practically impossible to take a photo of an Australian judge, especially one at this level. By convention (that is, unwritten norm, for which there is no source, but since I am familiar with the Australian practice you can take my and other Australians' word for it, it is true - if you want side evidence you can testify to the lack of even copyrighted photos on photo websites, such as Flickr and the like - there are simply no photos of this judge) they DO NOT APPEAR IN PUBLIC except by official invitations where photos are not usually allowed and in the court room, and by law by law it is illegal to take photos or cameras in court. Comparisons with Justice Michael Kirby are invalid, because that judge is a distinct exception to the above rule due to the human rights work he took on before he came on the bench and which he continues to do. I ask the closing moderator not to import American conventions onto Australian judges - the situations are markedly different and the situation I have described should be evaluated on its own merits and not according to conventions that do not apply to the Australian situation. This photo was provided in good faith to show an image of the judge in full compliance with fair use provisions under Australian copyright law - for the use of research as Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and in good knowledge that we are simply not going to get an image of the judge any other way, and we are without a method to improve this page without one. We have tried other methods such as contacting the court, and they will not provide such images (although being happy for this to be published here for research and study purposes). I will also note that this image is no longer available on the internet and will prevent it being seen if it is to be deleted. I ask that this not be deleted due to the combination of the above reasons - the fair use rationale is clear enough on this reason and can be amended to make any of my reasoning clearer if that is required. JRG (talk) 13:29, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete' - Judging by google images, he makes public appearances from time to time, e.g. here, where his photo was taken. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:21, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Official invitational event - the photos are official ones. You can't just turn up to these events and get them. JRG (talk) 05:37, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
- uploader has marked photos as being by Joe Quinn, Craig Saavedra (based on username, probably him but unsure), and Reid Russel, and cartoons by Scott Saavedra (this also could be him) and tagged them all GFDL. since we don't know which one he is, i recommend delete all unless we get more info. Mangostar (talk) 05:11, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- uploader has marked photos as being by Joe Quinn, Craig Saavedra (based on username, probably him but unsure), and Reid Russel, and cartoons by Scott Saavedra (this also could be him) and tagged them all GFDL. since we don't know which one he is, i recommend delete all unless we get more info. Mangostar (talk) 05:11, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- uploader has marked photos as being by Joe Quinn, Craig Saavedra (based on username, probably him but unsure), and Reid Russel, and cartoons by Scott Saavedra (this also could be him) and tagged them all GFDL. since we don't know which one he is, i recommend delete all unless we get more info. Mangostar (talk) 05:11, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- uploader has marked photos as being by Joe Quinn, Craig Saavedra (based on username, probably him but unsure), and Reid Russel, and cartoons by Scott Saavedra (this also could be him) and tagged them all GFDL. since we don't know which one he is, i recommend delete all unless we get more info. Mangostar (talk) 05:11, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Orphaned. Image does not clearly identify that the person who uploaded it is the same as the person who took it. While likely the same person, we should err on the side of caution and delete. Sufficient time has elapsed for such a disclaimer and the image can be restored if the deletion is in error. — BQZip01 — talk 00:00, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
- uploader has marked photos as being by Joe Quinn, Craig Saavedra (based on username, probably him but unsure), and Reid Russel, and cartoons by Scott Saavedra (this also could be him) and tagged them all GFDL. since we don't know which one he is, i recommend delete all unless we get more info. Mangostar (talk) 05:12, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Orphaned. Image does not clearly identify that the person who uploaded it is the same as the person who took it. While likely the same person, we should err on the side of caution and delete. Sufficient time has elapsed for such a disclaimer and the image can be restored if the deletion is in error. — BQZip01 — talk 00:01, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
- EccentricRichard (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic (is this high enough quality to be moved to commons as a generic person photo?) Mangostar (talk) 05:16, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Orphaned. Wikipedia is not an image repository. — BQZip01 — talk 23:57, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- EccentricRichard (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- orphaned wikistress thermometer. is this the sort of thing we move to commons? Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:20, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Orphaned image. Limited use on Wikipedia; other images already suffice. — BQZip01 — talk 23:54, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- EccentricRichard (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- sourced to random website, dead link Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:20, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete clearly from an outside source per uploader, but no copyright info available. Enough time has elapsed to make this change. Simply contact delete admin to restore if permission later obtained. — BQZip01 — talk 23:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- comment when uploading says "photoright walter nellen" - is this copyright walter nellen? if so, was his permission given for gfdl? Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:42, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Appears to be cropped image from larger photo. Poor quality, not encyclopedic. Needs better permission description, but enough time has elapsed. Delete for now, can be restored if necessary later when appropriate permissions are obtained. — BQZip01 — talk 23:50, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- pro photo, no OTRS confirmation of permission Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:45, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete While "featured on wikipedia" is certainly on the page, no explicit permission is granted either on the webpage or the photo's page. Plenty of time elapsed to add such information + people willing to assist. Image can be undeleted later if permission is granted. — BQZip01 — talk 23:47, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- pro photo, no OTRS confirmation of permission Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:45, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete While "featured on wikipedia" is certainly on the page, no explicit permission is granted either on the webpage or the photo's page. Plenty of time elapsed to add such information + people willing to assist. Image can be undeleted later if permission is granted. — BQZip01 — talk 23:47, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- pro photo, no OTRS confirmation of permission Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:46, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete While "featured on wikipedia" is certainly on the page, no explicit permission is granted either on the webpage or the photo's page. Plenty of time elapsed to add such information + people willing to assist. Image can be undeleted later if permission is granted. — BQZip01 — talk 23:48, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- pro photo, no OTRS confirmation of permission Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:46, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete While "featured on wikipedia" is certainly on the page, no explicit permission is granted either on the webpage or the photo's page. Plenty of time elapsed to add such information + people willing to assist. Image can be undeleted later if permission is granted. — BQZip01 — talk 23:48, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, possible copyvio? Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:58, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Howardhudson (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Rabbiofrock (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:01, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Aliceinnirvana (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:01, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:02, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:02, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- watermark suggests it was taken from copyrighted website (it's in chinese, so i'm useless) Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:06, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- photo of a photo - who took the original photo? Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:07, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- watermarked. copyrighted? Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:07, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete unless OTRS verification received. — BQZip01 — talk 23:35, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- don't know who orange dennis is, but i doubt it's the same as guucancat (who also seems to go by siva) Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:10, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Unless appropriate verification of copyright ownership of said image by uploader. — BQZip01 — talk 23:36, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- uploaded by friend of photographer, no statement of permission Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:12, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Unless appropriate verification of copyright ownership of said image by uploader. — BQZip01 — talk 23:38, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- uploaded by friend of photographer, no statement of permission Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:12, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Unless appropriate verification of copyright ownership of said image by uploader. — BQZip01 — talk 23:38, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- uploaded by friend of photographer, no statement of permission Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:12, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Unless appropriate verification of copyright ownership of said image by uploader. — BQZip01 — talk 23:37, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- photo by orange dennis (who?) Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:13, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete no copyright/source info. — BQZip01 — talk 23:34, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- uploaded by friend of photographer, no statement of permission Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:13, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete copyvio, no verification of imageholder's intent. — BQZip01 — talk 23:05, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- photo by 029 (who?) Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:13, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Unless appropriate verification of copyright ownership of said image by uploader. — BQZip01 — talk 23:06, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- ah, 029 is uploader's friend. but still no explicit statement of permission Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:14, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Unless appropriate verification of copyright ownership of said image by uploader. — BQZip01 — talk 23:06, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- another photo by 029, friend of uploader, w/o statement of permission Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:14, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Unless appropriate verification of copyright ownership of said image by uploader. — BQZip01 — talk 23:04, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- photo by xiaotao (who?) Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:15, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Unless appropriate verification of copyright ownership of said image. Outside border is not appropriate for the english Wikipedia. — BQZip01 — talk 23:03, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Tennisnet7 (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Image used only for deleted article Brandon R. Linker and now orphaned. Ricky81682 (talk) 06:18, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Tennisnet7 (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Image used only for deleted article Brandon R. Linker and now orphaned. Ricky81682 (talk) 06:19, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- another photo from pcpop.com, assume this is copyrighted Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:19, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Orphaned. probable copyvio. — BQZip01 — talk 22:57, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- another photo from pcpop.com, assume this is copyrighted Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:20, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Orphaned. probable copyvio. — BQZip01 — talk 22:57, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- another photo from pcpop.com, assume this is copyrighted Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:20, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Orphaned. probable copyvio. — BQZip01 — talk 22:57, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- photo by dennis (=/= uploader) Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:22, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Unless appropriate verification of copyright ownership of said image. Outside border is not appropriate for the english Wikipedia. — BQZip01 — talk 22:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- photo by dennis (=/= uploader) Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:29, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Unless appropriate verification of copyright ownership of said image. Outside border is not appropriate for the english Wikipedia. — BQZip01 — talk 22:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, appears Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:31, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:37, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:38, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Nelson_george (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:38, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:39, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Japuraalwis (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphaned UE image. Ricky81682 (talk) 06:41, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:41, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned. Obsolete: superseded by Image:Ty-Cobb-1913-NPC-detail-2.jpeg (on Commons). Eubulides (talk) 07:00, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete per above. — BQZip01 — talk 22:51, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Image has watermark. copyrighted? Mvjs (talk) 11:41, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Copyrighted image shows a living Australian man. Damiens.rf 11:50, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete per above. Orphaned. — BQZip01 — talk 22:49, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- 44GreenBlinks (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- {{PD-self}} tag belied by watermarked copyright notice on the image. —Angr 16:14, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Speedy delete Blatant copyvio. — BQZip01 — talk 22:47, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- 44GreenBlinks (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Image is a screenshot, so {{PD-self}} tag is bogus. —Angr 16:14, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete PD tag is bogus/copyvio. No benefit to encyclopedia as other images of this actor could be made/no analysis of image for artistic content; ergo no need for this image. — BQZip01 — talk 22:45, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Incorrect name (replaced with same image under correct name) Mangoe (talk) 17:05, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Deleted. Next time, images you uploaded yourself can be tagged for speedy deletion with {{db-g7}}. Images that are exact copies of other images with different names can also be tagged for speedy deletion with {{db-i1}}. —Angr 17:18, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- MichaelCPrice (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Non-commercial license cc-by-nc-sa-2.5 [2] Lokal_Profil 19:51, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- OR, UE. BJTalk 21:33, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. — BQZip01 — talk 22:25, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- OR, UE. BJTalk 21:36, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. — BQZip01 — talk 22:24, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- OR, UE. BJTalk 21:36, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete per nom — BQZip01 — talk 22:23, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Moncappytan (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Image of living people, for which it can be assumed free versions can be obtained, not significant or irreplaceable in context. MBisanz talk 22:15, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete per above. — BQZip01 — talk 22:17, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- "Limited rights"=="unfree". -Nard 22:57, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Copyvio. Cannot release someone else's image under a different license. — BQZip01 — talk 22:14, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Unencyclopedic, no source, bad claim of permission. -Nard 23:03, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete If the uploader can provide specific information as to how the image was obtained and OTRS confirms the permission, the image can later be restored. — BQZip01 — talk 21:49, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Why would a 1971 photo be GFDL? -Nard 23:14, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- The copyright holder of any picture can release it under GFDL even if the picture was taken before the license was created. GFDL is a license for use of said image, not applicable when the image is taken. — BQZip01 — talk 21:52, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Unless uploader provides the requisite information. — BQZip01 — talk 21:52, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Copyvio. -Nard 23:18, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Copyvio. — BQZip01 — talk 22:15, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- No source, copyvio. -Nard 23:19, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Unless valid source information is obtained. This is a photo of a state senator. The image may be releasable and usable, but without a link to the source, it is impossible to tell. — BQZip01 — talk 21:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Copyvio. Not possibly "pd-self" -Nard 23:20, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Blatant copyvio. Topps owns this image. The autograph could have been cropped & potentially used separately, but the intent is to show the player. Admins, please delete this image as soon as possible. — BQZip01 — talk 21:56, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Copyvio, no source. -Nard 23:29, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Unless valid source information is obtained. This is a photo of a state official. The image may be releasable and usable, but without a link to the source, it is impossible to tell. — BQZip01 — talk 21:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Added after deletion: no use=delete. Good call
- No proof copyright holder released this as PD. -Nard 23:31, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete concur with nominator's assessment. — BQZip01 — talk 22:02, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- No proof copyright holder released this as PD. -Nard 23:32, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete concur with nominator's assessment. — BQZip01 — talk 22:02, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 23:42, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Orphaned image (can be later restored if necessary). As for it being unencyclopedic, I think it could have its place. The status of the uploader is irrelevant. — BQZip01 — talk 22:05, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Blueberrypie12 (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- No proof this was produced by "indy media" and no proof their stuff is PD. -Nard 23:44, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- I forwarded an email from Portland Indymedia to OTRS some time ago -- not sure what happened. Please advise? -Pete (talk) 00:32, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
- I've heard about this OTRS permission, but does it cover this image? -Nard 00:34, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
- The email chain linked to the Tre Arrow article; this photo is/was the only photo published on that article, so I think it was clear what photo it was referring to. -Pete (talk) 16:59, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- I've heard about this OTRS permission, but does it cover this image? -Nard 00:34, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete The above argument is moot. The image is on Commons and this is an unnecessary duplication. — BQZip01 — talk 22:07, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Commons image showing through -Nv8200p talk 01:50, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
- Archive — BQZip01 — talk 03:04, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
- Commons image showing through -Nv8200p talk 01:50, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
- Maty_Glowacki (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 23:45, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Orphaned image (can be later restored if necessary). As for it being unencyclopedic, I think it could have its place on a user page, but other than that it holds no intrinsic value to an encyclopedia. The status of the uploader is irrelevant. — BQZip01 — talk 22:05, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- MidnightRunFan (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphaned, Copyright violation, Low quality, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 23:47, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Speedy Delete Orphaned copyvio. — BQZip01 — talk 22:09, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- JosipOnDeck (notify | contribs). - uploaded by
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Absent uploader Nv8200p talk 23:49, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Orphaned image (can be later restored if necessary), unencyclopedic. The status of the uploader is irrelevant. — BQZip01 — talk 22:05, 3 July 2008 (UTC)