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 I9 by Shell Kinney (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:13, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I could not find any statement of GFDL release at http://www.kaalov.com/ —Remember the dot ^(talk) 05:59, 13 November 2007 (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 B (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:13, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No real source information. Previously attributed to kaalov.com, but it is unlikely that that site holds the copyright. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 06:01, 13 November 2007 (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 as I4 by Shell Kinney (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:13, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Subject born 1897, no indication at source of photo date 140.247.243.169 08:14, 13 November 2007 (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 Shell Kinney (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:13, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Claims to be a self-made GFDL image, but it seems to be the image at the top of http://www.ccet.org/. Od Mishehu 10:32, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is my original work. I am webmaster of www.ccet.org (see in contact us information of site) the mail ID I have given and the mail ID of the webmaster and mail ID of my account at Wikipedia are same. I snapped this photo and have put it on www.ccet.org. There are no copy right issues with the image. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cbr07rr (talk • contribs) 10:44, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If so, please send an e-mail as directed on your talk page for the page Chandigarh College Of Engineering and Technology you've created - if you do this, then admins can conform your right to upload this image as your own. Otherwise, if you create a non-copyvio article about this college, then this image may keepable under fair use. Otherwise, this image will be deleted. Od Mishehu 10:57, 13 November 2007 (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 as F8 by Nyttend (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 01:13, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright template seems to infer Wikipedia is the copyright holder. This seems unlikely. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 18:32, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a photo that I took myself of "Downtown Everwood". Please tell me how to get it off of this list. — Val42 02:50, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've copied your statement of ownership to the image's description page. Now that you've clarified that, there should be no problems with keeping this image. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 03:22, 14 November 2007 (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 as I9 by Shell Kinney (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:13, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Likely copyvio--Vikimach 18:57, 13 November 2007 (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 as I9 by Shell Kinney (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:13, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Source site states "All Rights Reserved". And what the heck is "its ona public domain" supposed to mean? uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 20:54, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think someone has confused "being on the Internet" (i.e., on a public domain) with being in the public domain. It's quite possible that Selmer would license or allow this picture if asked, or even that it could qualify for fair use (given that it's a promotional photo that I've seen in every music instrument sales catalog, taken specifically to demonstrate a particular product), but it doesn't look like either the asking or the Fair Use justifying has been done.

btw, I happen to have a photo of a contrabass clarinet that I'd be willing to contribute to the project under CC-SA-BY ([1]), but it's not a very good photo (clips the bottom), and I think we should look for far better. -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 04:59, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We should look for better, but your close-in picture is a lot nicer than the Selmer low-res promo photo. I think replacing the other one with yours would be a good move, if you want to upload it.--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 14:37, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Commons image showing through --B (talk) 04:10, 15 December 2007 (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.