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⚡ 02:02, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:RCG Venezuela badge.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Derivative work. Kelly ^hi! 04:47, 2 October 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⚡ 02:02, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cyrus&Lionnel.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Source is given in the comment -- [1] but there's no evidence that the uploader owns the copyright. —SpacemanSpiff 07:27, 2 October 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⚡ 02:02, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sainte Jeanne d'Arc de nuit-large.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Principal architect Jacques Droz, only died in 1995, by EU terms thier copyright would not have yet expired. As this is an architectural work in france, FoP is not applicable. The image is still usable under fair use as it clearly shows key features of the architectural work which is mentioned in the article in which it appears. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:47, 2 October 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) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 02:02, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Brnswpp6.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• see commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Brnswpp6.jpg Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:21, 2 October 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⚡ 02:02, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dell PowerEdge 6800.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• http://www.emag.ro/sisteme_server/server-dell-poweredge-pe6850-2xdual-core-xeon-7110m-26ghz-8gb-2x73gb--pDELL-PE6850-03 -- Common Good (talk) 18:55, 2 October 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 as F4 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:04, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

• http://www.sify.com/news/President-reviews-Navy-s-prowess-imagegallery-national-jdqozMaifcc.html -- Common Good (talk) 18:55, 2 October 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⚡ 02:02, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

• http://www.schoolskerala.com/schools/navy_children_school/index.htm -- Common Good (talk) 18:55, 2 October 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⚡ 02:02, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:ANNUAL DAY.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• http://www.vizagcityonline.com/snapshots/2009/feb.html -- Common Good (talk) 18:55, 2 October 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⚡ 02:02, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Durham union society.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Uploaded on 10 March 2010, and http://uaforg.blogspot.com/2010_02_01_archive.html has the same image in a section dated 6 February 2010. The Flickr page (created in 2007) only has smaller sizes and "all rights reserved" and I assume that the licence status for the original size is the same. The source claimed on the file page - "I (Durham University) created this work entirely by myself" - makes no sense and User:Ac03awal has previously been warned for uploading images with false licences. Peter E. James (talk) 19:06, 2 October 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: Keep.-FASTILY ^(TALK) 08:35, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Suren-Pahlav Clan Signet Ring.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Photograph of an alleged archaeological object of unknown provenance, undocumented source, unlikely to be uploader's own work as claimed. Uploader was most likely an earlier incarnation of later banned sockpuppeter User:ParthianShot; as a rule, anything he said is not credible. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:08, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep unless you can provide evidence for either of the statements that you make above. No evidence has been here presented that the uploader is a sock of ParthianShot (and I don't see any in the uploader's userspace), and you've not shown why the uploader is unlikely to be the photographer. The uploader's other image upload was a copyvio from http://www.livius.org/su-sz/surena/surena.html, but I can't find this image there or in any related pages. Nyttend (talk) 01:31, 10 October 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⚡ 02:02, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Marys1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Identical to Flickr image with non-commercial licence. See also Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2011 October 2#File:Durham union society.jpg. Peter E. James (talk) 19:14, 2 October 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⚡ 02:02, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:St John's College Durham.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• User has uploaded other images that are probably copyright violations, and although I can't find a source for this image it has no metadata. Peter E. James (talk) 19:50, 2 October 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⚡ 02:02, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:FAB2COVERYELLOW.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Source is "I (Durham University) created this work entirely by myself" - unlikely to have been created by uploader. Peter E. James (talk) 19:53, 2 October 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⚡ 02:02, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Durham vs bristol.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Source is "I (Durham University) created this work entirely by myself" - unlikely to have been created by uploader. Peter E. James (talk) 19:54, 2 October 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⚡ 02:02, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:RushLimbaugh.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

• bad-quality, so own work claim sounds plausible. but it appears to be watermarked? or is the "watermark" just a part of the background? Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:50, 2 October 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⚡ 02:02, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eliz city nc flag.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• This looks like a Local city flag, so I'm not sure it can be treated as self Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:52, 2 October 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: Keep; file tagged as non-free.-FASTILY ^(TALK) 08:34, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Alois Hudal.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• rationale for being public domain appears to be invalid Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:01, 2 October 2011 (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. AnomieBOT⚡ 01:04, 9 October 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⚡ 01:02, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Johst-rosenberg.JPG (delete | talk | history | logs).

• public domain image rationale appears to be invalid Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:02, 2 October 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⚡ 01:02, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:CKLWCoverage1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• rationale for being public domain appears invalid Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:24, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There is no evidence that Baton Broadcasting and/or Canadian Broadcasting Corporation do not claim copyright on the image. Unverifiable PD claim. feydey (talk) 05:41, 7 October 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.