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 Mark Arsten (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 22:07, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:M-eux Test for QTP, testing an iOS app.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Software screenshot Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:10, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• License updated, free use rationale provided, can you place check? Thanks Fcarlier (talk) 12:49, 10 September 2013 (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⚡ 16:17, 10 September 2013 (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: Converted to fair use. Diannaa (talk) 21:07, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Coburg Districts Football Club Logo.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Football club logo artwork, not necessarily the uploaders. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:22, 10 September 2013 (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: Kept as fair use for one article. Uploader still needs to add a license template for their photograph. Diannaa (talk) 21:15, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:2013 Rolaids Packaging.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Packaging design is not uploaders. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:46, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader comment Asking for advisement on which license to use then; I wasn't exactly sure since there doesn't seem to be a good entry for product packaging. Nate • (chatter) 10:06, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

{{Non-free product cover}} and {{Non-free use rationale product cover}} Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:34, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the direction for the proper F-UR's and licensing templates; they have now been added as advised. Nate • (chatter) 06:45, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment the image has a FUR attached already, correcting the license could be done, since it has a FUR. -- 70.24.244.158 (talk) 05:13, 11 September 2013 (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⚡ 16:16, 11 September 2013 (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: Kept as fair use for one article. Diannaa (talk) 21:17, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Amber Smalltalk Logo.svg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• claimed as CC, by Fair use rationale provided. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:06, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment as it already has a FUR attached, why not just replace the license with a {{non-free logo}} ? -- 70.24.244.158 (talk) 05:14, 11 September 2013 (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: Kept. Diannaa (talk) 21:20, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lof Der Zotheid 500jr Munt 2011.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

• The file is a copyright violation of the copyright holder on the coin itself. Alternative depictions published by the copyright holder are available. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 10:56, 10 September 2013 (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⚡ 11:07, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Taken to Wikipedia:Non-free content review#File:Lof Der Zotheid 500jr Munt 2011.png. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 11:39, 10 September 2013 (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: Kept. Diannaa (talk) 21:21, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:€2 Portugal 2011 - Pinto.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

• The file is a copyright violation of the copyright holder on the coin itself. Alternative depictions published by the copyright holder are available. Eleassar ^{my talk} 10:58, 10 September 2013 (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⚡ 11:07, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Taken to Wikipedia:Non-free content review#File:€2 Portugal 2011 - Pinto.png. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 11:39, 10 September 2013 (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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 23:00, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:RevolutionofPigsposter8.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• no proof that this is the uploaders "own work" Redsky89 (talk) 14:28, 10 September 2013 (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 Mark Arsten (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 21:15, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

• These types of rides are not permanently installed, in my experience, but can be unplugged and moved from place to place. It's especially unlikely that it would be permanently installed on the public footpath. So freedom of panorama wouldn't apply. The ride is based on the Buzzy Bee toy, whose designer died in 1980,[1] so it is still under copyright. Avenue (talk) 16:08, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment the same argument can be made for anything. Vending machines clearly would be under the same restriction, as they are plugged in, and are wheeled about. Even regular installations on buildings would fall under that, since when businesses change, signs come down, and change, doors and windows are removed and new ones installed in their place. But these type of rides are usually installed in publicly accessible spaces, as opposed to spaces that are not accessible to the public (ie. clubs vs general access amusement parks), and are usually placed there for the long-term (ie. months to years). So, it comes down to what is considered public and what is considered permanent. -- 70.24.244.158 (talk) 05:27, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  Vending machines are usually more functional than creative, so don't necessarily fall under copyright. This ride is a derivative work based on the Buzzy Bee toy, which was IMO clearly creative enough to be under copyright. I'd agree it was publicly sited, but long-term is not "permanent" in the FOP sense, and vice versa; sand or ice sculptures can be considered permanently located somewhere even if they last only a day. --Avenue (talk) 08:35, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  There's more background on what counts as "permanent" here. It seems that siting it there indefinitely would count, so it probably qualifies for the NZ FOP exemption. However US FOP wouldn't cover it, so I've copied it to Commons. --Avenue (talk) 00:01, 18 September 2013 (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 Diannaa (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 23:00, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rodney Kellman Gangbang.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

• Uploaded as own work here, but the same uploader previously uploaded it to Commons as Commons:File:Onyx gangbang.jpg with the source and author given as "International Wrestling Syndicate". January (talk) 16:32, 10 September 2013 (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: All files on this list were deleted. Diannaa (talk) 21:28, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:NUAA collaborating with FORD, USA.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:NUAA Collaborating with Aairbus.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:NUAA collaborated with COSTIND.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:NUAA administrative building.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:NUAA Dormitories.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:NUAA Ming campus administrative buildings.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:NUAA paranormic view.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:NUAA Jing Campus.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:MING campus.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).

File:NUAA-1993-PRESENT.png (delete | talk | history | logs).

The files by this user appear to have been lifted from the Internet. For example:

• File:NUAA Dormitories.jpg = http://www.engineeringinchina.net/Nanjing.html
• File:NUAA Jing Campus.jpg = http://baike.soso.com/v115099.htm (thumbnail only)
• File:NUAA Collaborating with Aairbus.jpg = http://iao.nuaa.edu.cn/Colleges/College%20of%20Civil%20Aviation.htm

See also the user's talk page for other files tagged with {{db-f9}}. Stefan2 (talk) 17:42, 10 September 2013 (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.