Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images/2007 November 28

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 November 28 1.1 Image:Penguin_City.jpg 1.2 Image:Scientologylogo.png 1.3 Image:Slmcsbanner.jpg 1.4 Image:Transparent uno.jpg 1.5 Image:Colcannon 4215w.jpg 1.6 Image:BAP Palacios and BAP Villar (Sep 1973-USN).JPG 1.7 Image:Villianc.svg

[edit] November 28

[edit] Image:Penguin_City.jpg

No evidence of CC licensing from Bob Lynch as claimed. Jusjih (talk) 02:54, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

This is Bob Lynch. I thought I'd given proper copyright but it appears that I'm wrong. I'll try to sort it out later. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.73.217.244 (talk) 10:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

All of the comments on the above 194.73.217.244 talk page are vandalism warnings. I seriously doubt the above comment is actually from Bob Lynch. I think this image is suitable for deletion. User:Pedant (talk) 20:12, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Not deleted --B (talk) 01:09, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Scientologylogo.png

Derivative work from an image deleted per Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/2006_December_27#Image:Scientologylogo.GIF_.28talk_.7C_delete.29 Jusjih (talk) 04:03, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Slmcsbanner.jpg

With slmcs.org indicated, GFDL-self claim seems questionable. Jusjih (talk) 04:42, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Transparent uno.jpg

This image is merely showing how the CD looks like. I think it should be tagged the same way than a CD cover. Definitely non GFDL. -- lucasbfr ^talk 09:29, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Note from the uploader of the image: I don't agree at all. It is not a straight copy of the CD cover (if you can call a transparent sleeve a cover in the first place) and IMO it infringes copyrights as much as a photo of somebody holding a mobile phone infringes Nokia's trademarked designs. Furthermore I took the photo myself (yep, that's my hand), so I really fail to see what's wrong with a GFDL license. Rien Post (talk) 01:15, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

GFDL makes sense to me, assuming that is your hand and not a refugee from the Addams Family...--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 01:44, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Does that mean the case is closed and I can remove the PUI tags? Where does this go from here? Rien Post (talk) 14:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

"Listings should be processed by an administrator after being listed for 14 days. Images that are accepted following this fourteen-day period should have {{subst:puir}} added to the image talk page and a copy of the issue and/or discussion that took place here put on the image talk page as well."--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 14:24, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Not deleted --B (talk) 01:24, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Colcannon 4215w.jpg

If the text had simply been posted on WP, it would obviously have been a copy-vio, and I see no difference here. Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 17:23, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it wouldn't have been a copyvio, as recipes have been held to be generally non-copyrightable -- http://smallbusiness.findlaw.com/copyright/copyright-realworld/recipe-copyrighting(1).html.--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 22:22, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

The photo was of a generic recipe on the back of a bag of potatoes; it is no more copyright than a photo of a street scene containing adds in shop windows. (Sarah777 (talk) 22:27, 28 November 2007 (UTC))

Agreed, should be kept. The Evil Spartan 04:38, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Keep. User:Pedant (talk) 20:00, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:BAP Palacios and BAP Villar (Sep 1973-USN).JPG

[edit] Image:Villianc.svg

Closed on commons, should be closed here. ^Thanks, _{Luc "Somethingorother" French} 01:36, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

This is the same as Villianc.jpg, which itself is in danger of being PUI'ed. RageSamurai21655 (talk) 21:05, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh come on. It was created by the same person who did Image:Piratey, vector version.svg. Obviously both are amalgams of several type-characters, the end result of which is considered own work, right? --190.74.108.43 01:26, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but Villianc.jpg is in danger of being deleted because it looks too much like Snidely Whiplash. RageSamurai21655 18:48, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

If you go to the actual debate, you'll find that it's probably not going to be deleted: the mustached, hook-nosed, top-hatted villain was a well known stereotype well before Snidely Whiplash was even a sketch. ^Thanks, _{Luc "Somethingorother" French} 01:26, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

My mistake: It was closed already, as a keep. [1]. So this should be closed. ^Thanks, _{Luc "Somethingorother" French} 01:29, 6 December 2007 (UTC)