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 F8 by Athaenara (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 02:03, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Old Man of the Mountain overlay 2.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Missing OTRS evidence of permission. Kelly ^hi! 00:08, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Kelly, did you see my comment on the file's talk page? Is that not sufficient? --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:20, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes, that was why I brought it here for community discussion. Wikipedia policy on copyrights and permissions has changed a lot since the image was first uploaded, hopefully this can be clarified. Kelly ^hi! 00:25, 24 August 2011 (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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:03, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:NEW LOGO.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• school logo, no source, if legit, uploader would not be (c) holder Skier Dude (talk) 07:04, 24 August 2011 (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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:03, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pres GW Bush mounting jet.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• No source, and thus no evidence that this indeed is the work of a U.S. army employee and was taken in the course of his or her duties. May just as well be a private photo. Best source I could find was the George Bush Presidential Library, but they go at great lengths to clarify that their holdings may be copyrighted.[1]. Hence: either find evidence that this image indeed fulfills {{PD-USGov-Military-Air Force}}, or get the Bush Library to issue a statement that the image was PD and file that statement with OTRS, or make a fair use claim, or delete the image. Lupo 10:15, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • P.S.: Earlier "no source" tagging has been contested by the uploader. Lupo 10:16, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• It's not so simple. Please see the ongoing discussions at User talk:IZAK#File source problem with File:Pres GW Bush mounting jet.jpg. To clarify the matter, User Bwmoll3 (talk · contribs) has made an excellent suggestion. I have accordingly just sent an Email as he suggested to info@ogwb.org that reads as follows:

"To Whom It May Concern:

There is some debate on Wikipedia at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pres_GW_Bush_mounting_jet.jpg about the "source" of the photo (uploaded and posted since 2004), of President GW Bush at that time.

It was suggested that permission be granted from your office, see the discussion at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:IZAK#File_source_problem_with_File:Pres_GW_Bush_mounting_jet.jpg

Could your office please grant official use of this image.

Thank you in advance!

Yours sincerely,

User:IZAK of Wikipedia."

Hopefully we will get an official response soon and as soon as I do I will post it here and forward it to those concerned. So please be patient. Sincerely, IZAK (talk) 10:52, 24 August 2011 (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⚡ 02:03, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Paddy McMahon The Grand Design.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Cover of a book which has been assigned a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Nikthestoned 13:59, 24 August 2011 (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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:03, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bo caracas.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• I doubt the uploader drew the painting as the licensing states. –Drilnoth (T/C) 13:58, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No that is true, I did not draw the painting. But I do own the copyright, as it was transferred, first, to Bo Keeley from Linda Mears, then, second, from Bo Keeley to me. Let me know what you need as documentation of the transfer of copyright.Bwisok (talk) 01:25, 26 August 2011 (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⚡ 02:03, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:MoranShippingLogo2010.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Orphaned, use appears to only be permitted on Wikipedia (see how the uploader scrambled to change the licensing). –Drilnoth (T/C) 14:19, 24 August 2011 (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⚡ 02:03, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Canton Viaduct Proposed Changes.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• I don't think this is a work of the FEDERAL government, and the copyright is probably the person who made the rendering, not the uploaderJay8g (talk) 16:25, 24 August 2011 (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⚡ 02:03, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Canton Viaduct Proposed Changes 1993.PNG (delete | talk | history | logs).

• The copyright probably belongs to whoever made the rendering, not the uploader Jay8g (talk) 16:37, 24 August 2011 (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⚡ 02:03, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:BPRR Stock 1950.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• I am sure BPRR has a copyright on it, since it is only from 1950 Jay8g (talk) 17:03, 24 August 2011 (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⚡ 02:03, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:MORtshirt88.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• This is a poster for a tour. I doubt it belongs to the uploader. J Milburn (talk) 18:08, 24 August 2011 (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⚡ 02:03, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:2004 0103XSWfg0004u.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Tagged as being under the GFDL, however the description page says "Joe Wood Collection-Public". We need proper source information to verify the actual copyright status of this file, and I doubt the self-GFDL claim is valid. Orphaned. Acather96 (talk) 19:15, 24 August 2011 (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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:03, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:ClaraBow CarlBerglöw.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• No reason stated for Mats Karlströmer to be able to speak for the estate of the deceased artist Carl Berglöw. Binksternet (talk) 19:43, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Mats Karlströmer together with his brother Krister, are the sole right-owner's to Carl Berglöw's art according to the testament of which I hold a copy, signed by Greta Berglöw on November 20, 1987. Parrotistic (talk) 22:10, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• You will need to send a copy of that testament to Wikipedia:Volunteer Response Team who will assign an OTRS number to the image file. Better yet, go to Commons OTRS to file your testament copy and then upload the image to Commons. Binksternet (talk) 22:50, 24 August 2011 (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: Delete; the purpose of PUF is to determine the copyright status of a given file. If the copyright status cannot be determined, or is undetermined after two weeks, the file is deleted. Once the copyright status of this file can be ascertained in certainty, contact me and I will restore the file if necessary.-FASTILY ^(TALK) 00:15, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:KoppensteinerFamily123.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• From a family photo album, and is quite old, so it is unlikely that the uploader is actually the copyright holder of this work. Acather96 (talk) 19:44, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This was taken around I would say the 60's. My brother gave me tons of photos and this was one of them. I will get a hold of him and see when and who took this picture. --Frankonno (talk) 19:51, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh no! This picture was taken in the 40's, stupid me! My brother said this was taken by a family member. It's in the public domain. No one owns the image so could some one change the tagging for it to the right one. sorry. --Frankonno (talk) 20:02, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, at least for now. Myself and others are attempting to clarify the copyright status of this and other images. If we determine the image(s) are not acceptable on Wikipedia, we'll take appropriate action then. Until then, the uploader's image contributions are historically significant and need to be treated with care. --Hammersoft (talk) 12:36, 25 August 2011 (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.