Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2009/03/08
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Reasons for deletion request -Sonneninfo (talk) 01:00, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Closed. The file never existed. --Tryphon (talk) 18:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:Precision sundial in Bütgenbach-Belgium.jpg. --Sonneninfo (talk) 01:07, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Closed. The file never existed. --Tryphon (talk) 18:47, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
No OTRS ticket found, pending for almost three months Ciell (talk) 03:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Tryphon (talk) 18:53, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Centered Riding
[edit]- File:SallySwift.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Centered-rider-diagram.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Centered riding logo.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Has been pending for OTRS for almost three months now: as far as I can see, there's no ticket to be found though. Ciell (talk) 03:48, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Tryphon (talk) 18:53, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Pending for OTRS since dec 13th, still nothing to be found Ciell (talk) 04:11, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted by Túrelio: Missing essential information: source, license and/or permission: © The Tack Shed Equestrian Supplies. --Tryphon (talk) 19:26, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Pending for OTRS since dec 13th, still nothing to be found Ciell (talk) 04:11, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. PeterSymonds (talk) 01:36, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Pending for OTRS since dec 13th, still nothing to be found Ciell (talk) 04:14, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. PeterSymonds (talk) 01:37, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Waiting on OTRS mail since dec 13th, nothing found yet Ciell (talk) 04:17, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Delete 3 months is long enough! --Korman (talk) 06:10, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. PeterSymonds (talk) 01:39, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Pending for OTRS since dec 13th, nothing to be found though. Ciell (talk) 04:19, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. PeterSymonds (talk) 01:40, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Pending for OTRS since dec 13th, still nothing though. Ciell (talk) 04:21, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Sanbec (talk) 16:45, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Pending since dec 2008: nothing to be found yet though. Ciell (talk) 04:27, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Avi (talk) 06:46, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Pending for OTRS since dec 2008: nothing to be found yet though. Ciell (talk) 04:28, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Sanbec (talk) 16:38, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
It has no categories and isn't used. Jonjames1986 (talk) 04:30, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete Outside scope. Samulili (talk) 08:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Out of scope. Yann (talk) 11:39, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
It isn't used, has no categories, and there is no article on "Artistes en Direct" on the French wiki Jonjames1986 (talk) 04:34, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- The first two are not reasons for deletion, but it does appear to be out of scope. Delete. Carl Lindberg (talk) 15:52, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Sanbec (talk) 16:36, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Nondescriptive name, useless description and no categories, so finding a use is impossible Jonjames1986 (talk) 04:36, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Hm. In use here (wikimania site), purporting to be the Roman theatre in Alexandria. It doesn't look quite the same though, comparing with other images. The same uploader did make the similar-looking File:Arrraa.jpg, which is the Roman theatre there. Probably something in the immediate vicinity though, or some other section, as the two images were taken one minute apart. Tentatively
Keep, even though it is blurry. Carl Lindberg (talk) 15:50, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
It isn't used, has no categories, and an insufficient description Jonjames1986 (talk) 04:41, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete Outside scope. May require permission from people in the photo. Samulili (talk) 08:54, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. PeterSymonds (talk) 01:41, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
It isn't used and has no apparent use Jonjames1986 (talk) 04:43, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- The associated File:Asambleanacionaljr.jpg was briefly used (see this old edit) but quickly deleted as spam, probably due to the URL in the image. This image may have a use though, but unsure how notable it is. The picture does seem to relate to that section of the es:Juventud_Radical_de_Chile#La Mesa Nacional article though, which still exists. Carl Lindberg (talk) 16:06, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Kept. Sanbec (talk) 16:44, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Seems to be a logo made from another image "Asambleanacional.jpg." It isn't used Jonjames1986 (talk) 04:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Out of scope. –Tryphon☂ 12:27, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
It isn't used, no apparent encyclopedic use Jonjames1986 (talk) 04:47, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. We're not an encyclopedia, and I could think of a use for this, but it doesn't look self-made. It's not used nor has this request been challenged so I think deleting it is our best option. Rocket000(talk) 14:29, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Seems to be a product of the Australian Navy, not the US Navy. Photos taken by the Australian Navy are only usable under "Fair Dealing" laws, similar to Fair Use. As such, this is a copyvio image. --Malkinann (talk) 07:41, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. US-Gov-licence does definately not fit - it is copyright violation. --High Contrast (talk) 20:28, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete Taken in 1966, and I think Australian crown copyright lasts 50 years, so will be OK in 2017. Carl Lindberg (talk) 16:10, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. PeterSymonds (talk) 01:43, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Too bad quality to use it in any article moreover can be replaced by La gioconda.jpg
D-Kuru (talk) 08:16, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete "Examples of files that are not realistically useful for an educational purpose: Files that add nothing educationally distinct to the collection of images we already hold covering the same subject, especially if they are of poor or mediocre quality." COM:PS. Samulili (talk) 08:56, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Out of scope. Yann (talk) 23:04, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
derivative work, no FOP
D-Kuru (talk) 08:32, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination --High Contrast (talk) 09:03, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Keep derivative work? Why? no FOP? What do u mean by that? The image cc-BY on flickr and the uploader seems to have done it himself, unless u have proof on your claims.--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 09:31, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- LOL^^ I read a lot of del discussion, but I have not seen that comment so far. Why this iamge is a derivative work is explained on COM:DW. In short: Even you are may the author of any file the imagecontent could be a 3D figure witch is not ineligible for copyright and is copyrighted. So even you may have taken the image by yourself you can't licence it under a free licence (which is required on Commons). FOP is the shortcut for "Freedom of Panorama" which is explained on COM:FOP. In short: In some countries (Austria or Germany for example) buildings and artwork which is placed in a public place can be photographed AND licenced under a free licence. Some countries (France and Italy for example) don't allow to publish neither artwork nor buildings. Other countries (USA and Japan for example) only allow the free licence for buildings. Any more questions?
- --D-Kuru (talk) 10:58, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for answering the questions. Didn't know about this till now. I retract the upload and support a deletion. --Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 11:22, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- That's very constructional. That speaks in your favour. --High Contrast (talk) 20:26, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for answering the questions. Didn't know about this till now. I retract the upload and support a deletion. --Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 11:22, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted per COM:DW#Casebook. Next time please use {{Derivative}}. Regards. --Dodo (talk) 13:38, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
I don't think that this image is PD or licenced under CC
D-Kuru (talk) 08:35, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete definately not PD or CC: TV-screenshot --High Contrast (talk) 09:04, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. PeterSymonds (talk) 01:46, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Not licensed for commerical usage --AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 10:30, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted by Túrelio: Does not allow for commercial use: http://www.flickr.com/photos/justindc/9238910/. --Tryphon (talk) 18:56, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Foto Düse
[edit]- File:Luftbild Bahnhof Finkenkrug.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Luftbild Siedlung in Falkensee.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Luftbild Seegefeld-Rosentunnel.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
There is one ticket in OTRS that can be linked to this copyrightholder, the ticket only gives permission for File:Luftbild Rathaus Falkensee.jpg and File:Luftbild Falkenhagener See.jpg though. The images have been pending for almost three months now. Ciell (talk) 11:40, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- I am sorry for this but it is not my fault and it is not a copyright violation. I asked Mr. Düsterhöft for sending an e-mail to the otrs-team. Obviously he didn't do it. So I ask him again. OK? -- Serpens ?! 01:30, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
- P.S.: See also Mr. Düsterhöft's earlier approved images: Luftbild Falkenhagener See.jpg and Luftbild Rathaus Falkensee.jpg
- Mr. Düsterhöft wrote the mail today. Please check the OTRS again (I can send you his e-mail-address via wiki-mail if you want). Thanks, -- Serpens ?! 17:23, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
- Received in perfect order, nomination withdrawn. Ciell (talk) 22:58, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
- Mr. Düsterhöft wrote the mail today. Please check the OTRS again (I can send you his e-mail-address via wiki-mail if you want). Thanks, -- Serpens ?! 17:23, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Kept. OTRS permission received, nomination withdrawn. –Tryphon☂ 12:30, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
this migh not be FBI photo - it's likely to be copyrighted by Jeffco sheriff's office Robek (talk|contribs) 13:07, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Just to make it clearer - sheriff's office is not part of federal goverment, so licence is not applicable. also as far as I can remember any other police photos from columbine have been deleted or not included on commons for just this reason. They are part of en.wiki article as fair use --195.171.95.4 12:39, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete without link to the federal source of that image, its license is dubious. Masur (talk) 14:37, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. "sheriff's office is not part of federal goverment" Rocket000(talk) 14:30, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Pending for OTRS for three months, no mail to be found at this point. Ciell (talk) 12:04, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- I asked for the OTRS when I added the file, if the editor didn't answer, then the picture should be deleted. Vol de nuit (talk) 22:11, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. No OTRS permission. –Tryphon☂ 12:34, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
source page says "©2009 NJ TRANSIT and PORT AUTHORITY OF NY & NJ" ChrisRuvolo (t) 15:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Deleted, speedy. Samulili (talk) 21:34, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
I am in Doubt that this is own work, first upload, no metadata Abigor talk 15:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. Samulili (talk) 21:35, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Copyvio. Yann (talk) 23:01, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Pending for OTRS for almost three months, found nothing yet. Ciell (talk) 15:57, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete --Korman (talk) 06:11, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Sanbec (talk) 16:34, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
not used, a svg version exits --Superwikifan (talk) 16:15, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Kept. Per Commons:Deletion requests/Superseded. –Tryphon☂ 12:43, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Pending for OTRS for almost three months, nothing there yet. Ciell (talk) 16:15, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Logo is {{PD-textlogo}}, so no permission needed. In use at en: Ammann & Whitney, but I'm not sure of the notability of that article -- virtually all references are the company's home page. Carl Lindberg (talk) 16:17, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Kept as {{PD-textlogo}}. –Tryphon☂ 12:46, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
blurred Wasicu (talk) 16:37, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Keep No reason to delete. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:16, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
blurred Wasicu (talk) 16:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
very poor quality, superseded, not used --Superwikifan (talk) 16:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Keep No reason to delete. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:14, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
a cutted vesion exists, a svg version exists, not used --Superwikifan (talk) 16:44, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Keep No reason to delete. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:12, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
logo --Superwikifan (talk) 16:48, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Copyrighted logo, no permission. –Tryphon☂ 12:50, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
logo --Superwikifan (talk) 16:50, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Copyrighted logo and out of scope. –Tryphon☂ 12:51, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
low res version of File:Scott Stevens on Ice 2 crop.png; see disc. as well --Xgeorg (Diskussion) 07:10, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. No license. –Tryphon☂ 12:53, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
duplicate of File:Dimos Diou sculpture emblem.jpg. Previous unsigned comment added by User:Lemur12 16:35, 3 March 2009
- Delete Duplicate. Request by uploader. -- Deadstar (msg) 17:32, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Badseed talk 16:06, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
unused and unencyclopedic image. --Leoboudv (talk) 06:02, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Keep Clear illustration of a t-shirt with stylised alien. I don't see the problem (unless that alien image is copyrighted). -- Deadstar (msg) 17:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Kept. In scope. –Tryphon☂ 12:55, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
asked by author, unencyclopedic media --Superwikifan (talk) 17:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete speedy - television screenshot copyvio. -- Deadstar (msg) 17:28, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Copyvio. Yann (talk) 22:57, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
I uploaded a better, PNG version --Superwikifan (talk) 17:10, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Where is it? -- Deadstar (msg) 17:27, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Replace .gif with .png
- File:Europe Continuum.png --El Mexicano (talk) 20:19, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Kept. In use. –Tryphon☂ 12:57, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
There is no evidence that show this is a free image and its metadata's details are fake. --Superwikifan (talk) 17:13, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete Metadata is not fake, probably just made by a photo editing program. But it is a copyvio; see here (and tineye finds several other uses). Carl Lindberg (talk) 16:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Copyright violation. PeterSymonds (talk) 01:55, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
not used, gif version of an existing file, file turned -> can't read --Superwikifan (talk) 17:18, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Kept. Not a reason to delete. –Tryphon☂ 13:00, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Image has watermark saying www.bruijning.net - so possibly not self made. -- Deadstar (msg) 17:25, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Copyvio. Yann (talk) 22:56, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
logo for korfball supporters club. very likely not self made -- Deadstar (msg) 17:26, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Copyrighted logo. –Tryphon☂ 13:01, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
a cleaned version exists, not used --Superwikifan (talk) 17:41, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Kept. Deleting source images might break the “attribution path”, which breaks licenses such as the GFDL. –Tryphon☂ 13:06, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
out of COM:SCOPE; unused, though uploaded in september 2008; showing unknown and probably non-notable person; in addition, image seems to be digitally altered/retouched. Túrelio (talk) 17:57, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete "a simple photo", the description says. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:08, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Out of scope. Yann (talk) 22:52, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
unused image, very small, blurred --Superwikifan (talk) 18:25, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Kept. Not a reason to delete. –Tryphon☂ 13:08, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
low quality image, a svg version exists --Superwikifan (talk) 18:43, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Keep Nothing wrong with it. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:04, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
The file is not realistically useful for an educational purpose. Raven1977 (talk) 19:01, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Blurry low resolution image of a penis. Out of project scope. ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 19:18, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
The photographed person (Andrao Gabito) seems to be a hoax, such footballer does not exist. And Commons is not the right place for such photos — NickK (talk) 19:20, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete (It'salso very likely that the copyright information is a hoax, too.) Samulili (talk) 21:40, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Out of scope. Yann (talk) 22:55, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Derivative work of a, moste likely, copyrighted figure. No permission stated. High Contrast (talk) 20:02, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 22:51, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Derivative work of a, moste likely, copyrighted figure. Not de minimis. High Contrast (talk) 20:04, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Comment: Based on the uploader's earlier attempts at uploading this image, it appears to be a cell from the Disney production of Rapunzel. Tabercil (talk) 23:17, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Deleted. Clearly derivitive of Disney's version of the Rapunzel character (confirmed with images.google.com search for Disney + Rapunzel). Also unusably blurry photo. -- Infrogmation (talk) 23:51, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
I have very strong doubts zhat this pucture is copyright free. The uploder is well known for his copyright infringements. Mazbln (Diskussion) 20:49, 8 March 2009 (UTC) --Mazbln (talk) 20:50, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Definitely a copyvio. Deleted. odder 11:37, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
AVRS (talk) 21:15, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 22:51, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
http://www.gracija.ba/Tekst.aspx?TekstID=3264 Smooth_O (talk) 21:06, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- You should have nominated it for speedy deletion. Deleted. odder 11:39, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
This picture is not from bs.wikipedia, like all images uploaded by this user, it's probably copyrighted Smooth_O (talk) 21:10, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Avi (talk) 22:56, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Non-free logo: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Coat_of_arms_of_Tokelau.jpg Smooth_O (talk) 09:21, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Avi (talk) 22:55, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Logo Smooth_O (talk) 16:59, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Avi (talk) 22:55, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Non-free logo image, uploader does not have rights to bestow. TAnthony (talk) 21:42, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Rocket000(talk) 13:35, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Image of a painting created in 1970, so still copyrighted. ---- Deadstar (msg) 21:46, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Rocket000(talk) 13:36, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Description given is garbage, and two of the images that make up this triptych can be found elsewhere via TinEye (though they don't seem to be from Getty/WireImage) Tabercil (talk) 22:15, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Copyvio. Yann (talk) 22:53, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
The image is not {{PD-USGov}}, so the given license is not correct. The image is from the Chicago Daily News and published after 1923, so {{PD-US}} does also not apply. Please note http://lcweb2.loc.gov/ammem/ndlpcoop/ichihtml/copyres.html which says Fair Use and the very similar deletion request Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Horned animal skull sitting in the hand of a man in a room.jpg. Martin H. (talk) 22:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete Current copyright tag is certainly wrong, and no evidence given that it is public domain or free licensed for any other reason. Image may be found by entering image number DN-0079801 at [1] (no direct link to image description page evident). Library Of Congress makes no statement that it is public domain. Fortunately, the LOC has a couple dozen photos of Galli-Curci clearly marked "No known restrictions on publication", so there is no need to keep this questionable one. -- Infrogmation (talk) 23:42, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete Year of publication 1925; the Chicago history society says: "Otherwise, permission must be requested and granted by the Chicago History Museum prior to use." /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 00:14, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. PeterSymonds (talk) 01:59, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 22:48, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 22:49, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Image source originally was a Channel 4 documentary, which implies it's copyrighted. Additionally, while it may be freely distributable, that does not make it public domain. Tabercil (talk) 23:00, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. "He freely distributes the documentary, thus making this public domain." Sorry, that's not how that works. Rocket000(talk) 13:38, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
The file is not realistically useful for an educational purpose. Raven1977 (talk) 23:47, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete Although it is in use (on the Bangladesh wp, a case of mistaken identity). /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 00:09, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Avi (talk) 22:52, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
screenshot with IE, not PD shizhao (talk) 13:15, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Coyau (talk) 10:12, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Doesn't look like own work Samulili (talk) 18:57, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. MichaelMaggs (talk) 09:29, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Looks like a scan from a newspaper and not own work. Samulili (talk) 18:59, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. MichaelMaggs (talk) 09:29, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
No proof that the photo is taken by an US Government employee, only the usage in http://www-cgsc.army.mil/carl/resources/csi/odom2/odom2.asp does not make it public domain. Martin H. (talk) 19:59, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. MichaelMaggs (talk) 15:21, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Non-free logo image, uploader does not have rights to bestow; fair use version uploaded to WP TAnthony (talk) 21:38, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. MichaelMaggs (talk) 09:29, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
no permission from copyright holder —Preceding unsigned comment added by Александр Мотин (talk • contribs) 08:07, 8 March 2009 (UTC) (UTC)
Deleted. MichaelMaggs (talk) 15:22, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Was nominated for speedy deletion, but this looks quite old. I'm sure someone can find the source for this to confirm if it's PD-old Multichill (talk) 15:27, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Keep That's most likely contemporary from the 1840ies when the viaduct was built. Source would be great but there's no reason for copyright panic. --Herbert Ortner (talk) 18:23, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Kept. Obviously PD-Art. Yann (talk) 22:29, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Pending for OTRS for almost three months now, nothing there yet. Ciell (talk) 16:00, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- I uploaded this picture, but it's not mine. I asked the author if i could upload it in wikimedia and he gave me the permission. this is the e-mail:
- " Hello Iñaki,
- Sorry for a delay in responding, but I haven't checked my miksi.net emails for a while as I've been on vacation.
- Thank you for your message though. I'm glad you like some of my photos.
- I will gladly give you the permission to put either of these Ailakkajärvi photos your wikipedia article. I have some difficulty doing it since I don't understand the language (basque language?) on the page, so I don't how and where to edit, where to add the photos etc... :)
- If you want you can upload or link the photos to your article, you may do so if you just mention that the photo(s) are copyright by me.
- -Mika "
- In any case, permission email should be sent to OTRS. But this permission is not enough; Mika says you can use the images on wikipedia, but we need permission to use the images for any purpose. He should also choose a specific license (for example GFDL or cc-by-sa-3.0). --Tryphon (talk) 19:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Pufff...what should I do? kanuto 21:10, 8 March (UTC)
- Try getting him to send us (OTRS) a declaration of consent, with that everything should become clear. Ciell (talk) 23:02, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
- Pufff...what should I do? kanuto 21:10, 8 March (UTC)
Deleted. T + 1 month, still nothing in OTRS. Eusebius (talk) 13:09, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
El origen de la imagen es incorrecto ya que el autor de la obra es el pintor Guillermo Roux, y no el usuario que la subió; por ende los términos de la licencia elegida son inaplicables por no contar con la autorización necesaria. --Lancaster (talk) 18:44, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted, no permission. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 17:29, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Aloecure
[edit]- File:AloeCure Natural.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Aloecure nat small.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Aloecure natural resize for email.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
These three pictures have been pending for OTRS permission for almost three months now, I can't find anything yet though.
user:Sdm9093 uploader a new file two days ago:
- File:Aloecure wiki pic.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
which would be derivitave work and needs the permission as well. Ciell (talk) 16:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
I have permission to use all of these images, however, some of these are redundant. Shall I remove the earlier three:
- File:AloeCure Natural.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Aloecure nat small.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Aloecure natural resize for email.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
And keep the newest?
- Well, we at least need the written permission send to OTRS, otherwise all of these files have to go... Ciell (talk) 08:17, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Martin H. (talk) 16:11, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Source does not mention GFDL license, thus missing permission. ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 19:13, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
FYI: Also have a look at the previous discussion on User talk:ChrisiPK#What copyleft means. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 19:17, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Comment Honestly, I can't remember if the original had any mention of GFDL and then removed it or what (that's uncyclopedia for you). I barely remember uploading this. I know it was transferred from a Wikipedia (zh, I think) where it did have a GFDL, but who knows who put it there. Being Wikipe-tan, I didn't question the license because character's creator has released all his Wikipe-tan work freely. Maybe the permission can be dug up, but it's not worth the effort, IMO. It's not like it's extremely useful or anything. Rocket000(talk) 19:30, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:41, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Flickr has the same photo, same uploader (judging by username) but different licence (All rights reserved on Flickr). Flickr also says that the photographer is Deen van Meer. His website has similar high quality copyrighted images: http://homepage.mac.com/deenvanmeer/musical/The%20Lion%20King/ I think this is a copyvio -- Deadstar (msg) 20:18, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. MichaelMaggs (talk) 20:11, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
FC Twente kit images
[edit]- File:Kit body FC Twente20082009.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Kit body FC Twente20082009uit1.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Kit body FC Twente20082009uit2.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Someone nominated these for deletion, but didn't complete the request. I think they should be deleted for the original reason given "copyrighted logo". Basically these kits should not have the logo/sponsor etc. stuff on them. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 16:19, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Kept. Way too small to matter. They're just a couple pixels. I have no idea what they're even supposed to look like. See COM:DM. Rocket000 (talk) 03:31, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
The permission is too vague. Permissions should clearly state that reproduction and modification are allowed also commercially. --Samulili (talk) 20:37, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
I don't agree with the deletion request. This photo was taken by a Thalía fan in a concert and as the author of the photo, she has given clearly the permission to use it for Wikipedia any purpose. --El Mexicano (talk) 16:33, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
- Keep The permission says: "I ... give you my permission to use my photos in any way you see fit". I don't see any problem here.--Gothika (talk) 20:00, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
- Keep I agree... seems to be unambiguous. Tabercil (talk) 21:52, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Another problem with the permission is that it says "I give you..." Permissions should be for everyone. Samulili (talk) 10:03, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
- But hello! Don't you want to analize also the sintax and the morphology of the sentence? Obviously she gave me the permission as it was me who requested it... Keep in mind that a simple person will not understand at all what these licenses are, not even if I tell her what to write down in a permission. Maybe those in the Wikimedia Foundation are all lawyers or I don't know what, but a simple person will understand nothing of these nonsense rules!!! You should be happy if users try to act according to these absurd "rules", because they are all an unnecessary nonsense! How will you explain, for example, to a 15-year-old guy/girl who took a photo in a concert and wants to share it with all the world, these silly license things??? --El Mexicano (talk) 10:58, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
- Delete Permission, if accurate, is given ONLY to zoli@mdcthalia. The best option would be for tonchi to e-mail OTRS with permission. The second best option would be for zoli to do so (as s/he has permission to do what ever s/he wants). But the permission to zoli does not necessarily extend to the Wikimedia Commons. -- Avi (talk) 23:12, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Kept. AGF: the permission seems fine to me. Yann (talk) 22:33, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
- Overruling, as that is just so bad reasoning. COM:DEL#Overview, Commons:Project scope/Precautionary principle, Commons:Project scope/Evidence. Samulili (talk) 08:54, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Kept, per Gothika cs. Kameraad Pjotr 17:59, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Sheet music and MIDI files by Bottomline
[edit]- File:Stardust 1.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Stardust 2.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Man I Love.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Night In Tunisia.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Night In Tunisia.mid (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Night In Tunisia.flac.ogg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:GroovnHi.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:GroovnHi.MID (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Greensleeves.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- not sure of this one; description says: Jimmy Garrisons bass line on the solo section of Eric Dolphy's arrangement of the Traditional »Greensleeves« as played on John Coltrane's 1961 record »Africa/Brass«
- File:Inchworm.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Inchworm.mid (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- description says: Jimmy Garrison's bass line on John Coltrane's version of the Frank Loesser tune »Inchworm«
- File:Get Ready.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- description says: bass line of the 1966 Temptations song »Get Ready« as played by James Jamerson
- File:Sunshine of your love.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- description says: Jack Bruce's bass line on Cream's »Sunshine of your love«
- File:Acknowledgement.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Acknowledgement.mid (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- description says: Jimmy Garrison's bass line on »Acknowledgement« from the 1964 John Coltrane album »A Love Supreme«
- File:Amira Andaluciyya.mid (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Al-Amira al-Andaluciyya.flac.ogg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Al-Amira al-Andaluciyya.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- by Munir Bashir
- File:Miles Davis So What.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- by Miles Davis
- File:SenorBlues.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Barretto Amor Artificial.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Barretto Amor Artificial.mid (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- description says: Horn section from Ray Barretto's version of »Amor Artificial« (comp. C.C. Alonso, arr. O. Hernández)
- File:Nascimento Vera Cruz.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Nascimento Vera Cruz.mid (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
File:TheoLodz.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)File:TheoLodz.MID (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)not sure of this one; description says: »Theo, wir fahr'n nach Lodz« opening motif from a Jewish song of Łódź from late 19th century, which was 1974 chart hit in West Germany, sung by Vicky Leandros
- File:Subconciouslee.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Subconciouslee.MID (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- by Lee Konitz
- File:SSkunkFunk.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:SSkunkFunk.MID (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Bird Of Paradise.ogg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Scrapple From The Apple.ogg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Twisted.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Twisted.MID (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- description says: Excerpt from Wardell Gray's „Twisted“ w/ added lyrics by Annie Ross
- File:SymphonySid.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:SymphonySid.MID (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- not sure of this one; description says: Riff theme from „Jumpin' with Symphony Sid“, ascribed to Lester Young
- File:Honeysuckle Rose.ogg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- description says: Excerpt (12 sec) from Coleman Hawkins' 1934 recording of Fats Waller's composition »Honeysuckle Rose«
- File:HadenRambling.PNG (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:HadenRambling.MID (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- description says: last 16 bars of Charlie Haden's improvised bass solo on “Ramblin'” by Ornette Coleman
- File:IanDurySDRR.PNG (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:Ian Dury SDRR.MID (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- description says: Riff figure from “Sex & Drugs & Rock'n'Roll”, by Ian Dury and the Blockheads
- File:SegmentHadenSolo.PNG (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:SegmentHadenSolo.MID (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- description says: Charlie Haden's improvised bass solo on “Segment”, by Charlie Parker
A large number of the files uploaded by Bottomline (talk · contribs) seem to be excerpts from works by 20th century musicians or composers, and thus still likely to be covered by copyright. They may well qualify as fair use, but this is not enough to make them suitable for Commons. (Some of these works might be PD in the United States if they were published without a copyright notice or if their copyright was not renewed. I have not attempted to carry out any kind of copyright search to see where this might be the case, but as far as I can tell none of the listed files assert it.)
Note that the user's upload history also includes several files depicting simple musical scales, which are presumably PD, as well as some excerpts from old or otherwise PD works; if I've included any such in the list above by mistake, please strike them out. Also note that the list above includes a few files that were either originally uploaded to the German Wikipedia by Benutzer:Bottomline and transferred here by other users, or that are derivatives created by other Commons users (including two created by myself).
(Ps. See also existing nomination Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Billie Vocal 1st A section.ogg.) —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 16:43, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Hmm... this is tricky stuff. Note, for one thing, that I uploaded the major part of these files quite some time ago, when it was still pretty unclear which kind of music snippets were acceptable (not that it's become so much clearer in the meantime). Since then, common practice in the German Wikipedia and here have gone separate ways, the crucial point being that the sheer brevity of many of the excerpts make them acceptable in the context of an article on de. This, by the way, is the main reason why I stopped uploading music files on Commons altogether at some point in 2008 or so - it's just too difficult to understand. I'd say that most of these files are, to this day, okay with the policies of de-WP. In many other cases, I think (but I am not completely sure) that such musical material as improvised accompaniments (bass lines, in many cases) or improvised jazz solos do not qualify for copyright the same way "legit" compositions do. Mind you, I'm not implying that anything improvised is somehow aesthetically "inferior" to something that's been written down beforehand - quite the contrary. But the reality is, there are so many books on the market, so many sites on the internet offering transcriptions of great improvisations, jazz, rock, ethnic, you name 'em, and to my knowledge none of the musicians ever got any money out of it - basically giving the lie to Stravinsky's famous dictum that improvisation is spontaneous composition. These things are not treated the same way in the world out there, which is why I don't think there should be a different "legislation" here on Commons. It's a lot of material, though, I'd be grateful if we can discuss in every single case how to proceed: Keep, move to de or, if nothing helps, delete. For example, a ditty like "Jumpin' with Symphony Sid", although generally attributed by jazz folklore to the great Lester Young, is, an probably always has been, what jazz players call a "public domain lick". To my knowledge, the riff isn't copyrighted at all. The Ian Dury song probably is, although the "composer" himself readily admitted the lick in question has been has been taken over lock, stock and barrel from a Charlie Haden solo on an Ornette Coleman composition... well, I guess you've gotten my point in the meantime. Looking forward to your comments, --Bottomline (talk) 19:08, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the speedy response. In case it wasn't clear from my original nomination, I'd like to clarify that I certainly don't want to see these files deleted — I listed them here because I felt that at least some of them seemed problematic with regard to current Commons policy (which, unfortunately, does tend to impose requirement beyond what most reusers would see as practical), but if you or anyone else here can find justifications for claiming as many as possible of them as PD or otherwise acceptable on Commons, I'm all for it. For example, if others don't disagree, I'd be glad to strike the "Jumpin' with Symphony Sid" files from this nomination just based on your comments above.
- Also, I'd be glad if someone who knew more about the subject could chime in on a) where the generally accepted threshold of originality for simple melodies like this actually lies under U.S. law, and b) what the copyright status of improvised melodies (either first published as sound recordings or merely performed in public without being fixed in tangible form at all) is under (pre-1976) U.S. copyright law. I know enough about copyright law to know that things can get tricky in such cases, but I'm not a lawyer and I don't really know enough to say anything definite. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 20:14, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- "TheoLodz.MID" - "song of Łódź from late 19th century" should be PD then?! See as well on de:Theo, wir fahr’n nach Lodz. It was 1914 a song for the austrian army. If i understand t right with the same melody...Sicherlich Post 18:51, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- Ah, yes, you're right. I think I got a bit confused because the PNG version's description only mentioned the 1974 date. I've struck them off the list. Sorry. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 15:51, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
Given given a) that this request has remained open for two and a half months without anything more conclusive than the above, b) that even my attempt to solicit additional input doesn't seem to have helped at all, and c) that I've come to suspect that some of my initial reasons for nominating these files for deletion amount to excessive copyright paranoia, I've come to feel that it would be best if I were to withdraw my nomination. This request has been hanging long enough, and I'm not even sure I should've made it in the first place: let's just close it. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 05:31, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Request withdrawn. Ilmari Karonen (talk) 19:37, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Very similar, but better quality image exists under different name thumb — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pkuczynski (talk • contribs) 21:35, 8 March 2009 (UTC) (taken from image page)
Kept. Images are different and both in use. Rocket000 (talk) 18:24, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
Motorsport 84.140.106.23 13:57, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Kept, rationale doesn't make sense, icon of "Informative Listen und Portale over at de.wikipedia. --The Evil IP address (talk) 21:24, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
Hardly "own work". Probably just downloaded from some website. Damiens.rf 03:40, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Kept, if it is, I can't find it. Kameraad Pjotr 11:52, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
Most likely copyright Infringement file. I found another version of this file (See [2]), which I assume is a cropped file of a TV show chapture because of the 16:9 ratio. This contributor only uploaded this one file. 61.120.241.1 13:18, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- Comment: Aspect ratio is extremely common – not limited to television – and likely due to it being a banner image --dsprc (talk) 14:14, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- This person is a very famous Japanese singer. The quality of the photos and the use of fonts are the work of a professional. This should be considered. This is not a job for amateurs. --61.120.241.1 14:31, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- It's just a photo of a person standing against a wall, with standard typefaces (which isn't the same as a "font") featuring drop shadows on the text. Such a work was within the realm of toddlers decades ago, much less now. One need not overstate the skill required – especially on Commons, where we've the most amazing works created by amateurs (even monkeys!). --dsprc (talk) 14:47, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- This person is a very famous Japanese singer. The quality of the photos and the use of fonts are the work of a professional. This should be considered. This is not a job for amateurs. --61.120.241.1 14:31, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- The presence of other photographs taken by professionals would be a serious basis for infringement of the right of authorship. --61.120.241.1 15:25, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not contesting the DR – merely commenting on issues related to some statements therein. Which continue being presented – such as assumptions on the work being created by professionals, or the original uploader is not a professional (we have many professionals contributing to this project). I think I understand the sentiment you're trying to express, and mostly agree, but the wording of the statements are entirely nonsensical. --dsprc (talk) 15:53, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- The presence of other photographs taken by professionals would be a serious basis for infringement of the right of authorship. --61.120.241.1 15:25, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; advanced reverse image searches confirmed online 6 months before Wikimedia upload (galusodanbu/daily/200712/03/). --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:15, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Hardly "own work". Probably just downloaded from some website. Damiens.rf 03:40, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Maybe, downloaded from this page.--sergei (talk) 14:44, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Copyvio as per sergei's link Captain-tucker (talk) 20:44, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
