October 17

edit
Image:NotreDameAcademyGreenBay.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by User:Bobbarker1291 (notify | contribs).
  • Sneaky image vandalism/duplicate of Commons image with decreased value. The image is a derivative of an image that I took and uploaded to the page. It is a crop of another image listed on October 16. To quote a recent edit summary from Bobbarker1291: "I Changed The Photo to a more recent one, Please don't change it back! The words on the sign are about me!" Can this be speedy deleted as vandalism? Royalbroil 02:11, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can you provide a link to your version for comparison? Tempshill 03:22, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I wouldn't call it blatant vandalism, but yes, they're both improperly licensed derivatives -- delete them both. -- RG2 01:55, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Helibanneradidas.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Robfisher21 (notify | contribs).
  • Possible copyvio from same source as [2]. No documentation on that website that it's public domain as claimed by uploader. Tempshill 03:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Could you please provide a link to the page on the HOBS site that contains these images? I'm unable to locate either of them.

Deconstructhis 04:46, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Helidimensions.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Robfisher21 (notify | contribs).
  • Possible copyvio from same source as [3]. No documentation on that website that it's public domain as claimed by uploader. Tempshill 03:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unless the uploader can demonstrate that they are able to legally approve the use of the HOBS corporate logo on Wikipedia, I would strongly support removing both of the 'explanatory' line drawing images as a violation of a copyright held by the HOBS corporation.Deconstructhis 04:51, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Helitakeoff.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Robfisher21 (notify | contribs).
  • HOBS logo in the corner shows that this is either an advert for HOBS, or is a copyvio from HOBS. No evidence given that it's in the public domain as claimed by uploader. Tempshill 03:20, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Vietnam_Campaign_Medal_obverse.png (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by PalawanOz (notify | contribs).
  • It's not a free image because the permission prohibits modification (must be "reproduced accurately"). It fails the non-free content policy because it is replaceable with a free image of such a medal.  But|seriously|folks  03:51, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The only change that was made to the image was a reduction in white space (from memory) - with no change to the image of the medal itself - if it will make you happy, then I will replace this image with the original from the NZDF with the white space left in. I believe your argument about this being 'non-free content' is false, as the NZ Crown Copyright states that it "may be reproduced free of charge" - hence by definition it is free content. PalawanOz 08:04, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The point isn't that I want you to post it unmodified. The point is that the permission is limited to unmodified versions, which is too restrictive for free use here. And since it's replaceable with a truly free image of the medal, it can't be used per our non-free content policy either.
Can you please point me to the policy that defines that permission as being too restrictive for free use? PalawanOz 06:45, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In particular, the NZ Crown Copyright notice that comes up on Wikipedia states "For the purposes of Wikipedia, this is a non-free licence, since modification is not permitted, however most images uploaded under this licence may be allowed when a fair use rationale is given." I think your proposal to delete is in error. PalawanOz 06:58, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would also direct you to the discussion at the Category talk:New Zealand Crown Copyright images page which seems to have addressed a number of concerns, including those you quote above. PalawanOz 07:18, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with this image is the sufficiency of the fair use rationale. This is a replaceable nonfree image, so it can't be kept. This would be the same if it were a copyrighted photo of the medal. Calliopejen1 02:42, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry - I don't understand - what do you mean by the "sufficiency" of the FUR?PalawanOz 07:56, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Kcchap.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Chattingwithchapman (notify | contribs).
Image:Riad Fez 1.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Cuckooroo (notify | contribs).
Image:216.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Kayteeflo (notify | contribs).


Image:Rugova.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by ChrisO (notify | contribs).
  • we already have one nonfree official portrait of the subject Calliopejen1 12:49, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Judyc.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Pepso (notify | contribs).
Image:Arash.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Arash m (notify | contribs).
Image:Ukr_Navalaviation_gen.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Counterstrike69 (notify | contribs).
Image:Party.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Tweety21 (notify | contribs).
  • Orphaned, LQ image, uploaded by banned user so it's unlikely that anyone would ever use this blurry snapshot of someone's back. Precious Roy 16:32, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Jusco2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Soehoi (notify | contribs).
Ooops, sorry. I was spacing. Change to Delete. --Knulclunk 03:25, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I see no claim that the image has been released under the GFDL. -- RG2 23:59, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Sdfghjysdgjygyg.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Bobit13 (notify | contribs).
  • orphan, unclear encyclopedic value, likely copyvio Calliopejen1 17:25, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:3DG.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Bobit13 (notify | contribs).
  • orphan, unclear encyclopedic value, likely copyvio Calliopejen1 17:26, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Me87r3984.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Busdriver101 (notify | contribs).
Image:Bartok Baba Yaga.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Nubula (notify | contribs).
  • Invalid fair use: the image is not used in a article about film: it is used for illsutration of Russian mythological creature. `'Míkka 18:24, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It is used for critical commentary of a pop culture illustration of a mythological creature. May be fair use.--Knulclunk 03:11, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep It's a pop culture representation of said mythological creature, as the image caption clearly states, and is the only pop culture version of this creature on its page despite the page having a large pop culture section (which would be completly devoid of images if it where deteted and thus detrimental to readers). And it is fair use. Nubula 10:21, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure it's appropriate to keep it in both articles, or at all, but there does seem to be a consensus to keep without any rebuttal. Image kept. -- RG2 22:11, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]