The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:06, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Taken from http://www.q2-agency.com/president.html BrokenSphere^{Msg me} 01:03, 1 September 2009 (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 image 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: Kept, text logo. Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:40, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copryighted logo, no proof that the uploader has the rights to release it as PD. BrokenSphere^{Msg me} 01:05, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think this in the public domain per {{PD-textlogo}}. IronGargoyle (talk) 16:06, 2 September 2009 (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 image 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 Prolog (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 20:58, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Upload accompanied copyvio text in Ducati 1098 and appears substantially identical to http://www.bikeexif.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/martini_racing_ducati.jpg Brianhe (talk) 01:14, 1 September 2009 (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 image 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 19:14, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

appears to be publicity photo, no source Skier Dude (talk) 02:01, 1 September 2009 (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 image 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:06, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image used on qdecoder.org, which brings into question if the user created or owns the copyright to the logo. — Σxplicit 03:29, 1 September 2009 (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 image 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:06, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A promotional picture of the individual, not likely that the uploader holds the copyright to the image. — Σxplicit 03:41, 1 September 2009 (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 image 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:06, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A promotional picture of the individual, not likely that the uploader holds the copyright to the image. — Σxplicit 03:44, 1 September 2009 (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 image 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: Image has since been tagged as non-free. However, it is orphaned, which fails NFCC. -Andrew c ^[talk] 22:03, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt the Chinese Taipei Paralympic Committee releases its content under the GFDL. In any case, unused, low quality image. J Milburn (talk) 09:10, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm the uploader. The document is not being used as an image but in the article "John McFall (athlete)" (footnote 31) as a source for its content, which I have not been able to find anywhere else. If the file is opened as a PDF it looks fine. I originally uploaded it to the Wikimedia Commons where it received OTRS clearance, but it was subsequently deleted for not being within the scope of the Commons. I therefore uploaded it here, but forgot to obtain separate OTRS clearance. I have just sent the relevant e-mail correspondence to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 15:54, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An OTRS reviewer has now added a tag to the file description page stating that the e-mail correspondence was unfortunately "not sufficient to confirm permission for this page/file". Is it possible, then, to apply a fair-use licence such as "{{Non-free fair use in}}" to the file rather than delete it entirely? I believe that all the non-free content criteria are satisfied. In particular, I would point out that the file is referred to in a footnote and not reproduced in its entirety as a graphic in the article. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 22:18, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This image is currently tagged as non-free. If there is a dispute with the rationale, please tag the image with {{dfu}} or list it at WP:Non-free content review. Otherwise, unless there is another reason for listing here, the listing will be closed by an administrator and the image kept. AnomieBOT⚡ 03:06, 18 September 2009 (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 debate of the proposed deletion of the media 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: kept reduce was supplied. Skier Dude (talk) 01:40, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Image uploaded 20:30 9 October 2007 with dimensions 1,491x1,419 is not a low resolution image and shall be deleted because its violates WP:NFCC Cdl obelix (talk) 10:51, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This image is currently tagged as non-free. If there is a dispute with the rationale, please tag the image with {{dfu}} or list it at WP:Non-free content review. Otherwise, unless there is another reason for listing here, the listing will be closed by an administrator and the image kept. AnomieBOT⚡ 20:58, 1 September 2009 (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 media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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. — ξ^xplicit 21:55, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Cheque design still copyrighted Stifle (talk) 14:04, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Simple forms are not copyrightable. I fail how to see how this cheque is anything but a simple form. IronGargoyle (talk) 16:04, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• This cheque was supplied by the bank to my deceased mother Doris Ogilvie. I consider that there are no copyright concerns and is an interesting example of such cheques (she was organising a cultural trip for a group to Italy!).--Duncanogi (talk) 15:10, 6 September 2009 (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 image 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 Drilnoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 19:14, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Derivative work. Photograph of packaging. J Milburn (talk) 17:01, 1 September 2009 (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 image 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:06, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Publicity still/screenshot from Wizards of Waverly Place. I doubt the uploader owns the rights to this image. J Milburn (talk) 17:09, 1 September 2009 (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 image 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:06, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blatantly a photo of a photo- I doubt the uploader owns the rights to the original photo. Note that an identical image was uploaded to Commons by a different user. J Milburn (talk) 17:12, 1 September 2009 (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 image 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 Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:06, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Copyrighted album cover- album by Basshunter. J Milburn (talk) 17:28, 1 September 2009 (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.