April 2

edit
Uploaded by User:Tomcool (notify). obsoleted by Image:IISI TopSteel2005.png-Tomcool 00:59, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Fosnez (notify). CV. There's not really any decent claim of fair use here -- just because an image is widely available on the internet doesn't make it okay for our use. This is an easily reproduced image if anyone has a speaker handy.- kmccoy (talk) 01:49, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So somehow a picture used by a company to "promote their work or product in the media" isn't allowed to be used? The tag on it specifically says we can use this type of image "in the absence of free images". Fosnez 06:26, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by @@@@@@ (notify). UE. Currently OR too. Tickle porn. Uploader claims GFDL-self but I'm not entirely convinced - the 2x2 image is characteristic of clips4sale.com .- FreplySpang (talk) 01:50, 2 April 2006 (UTC)).[reply]
Hi there; my friend took some photos for me and I wanted to make this clear (i.e. not claiming personal credit for the photo as seems to be implied by GFDL-self): he has given them to me and said he's ok with them being used on the web -I have since editted them, some for my webpage and this one on wikipedia- but I will speak in the morning to double-check that he's happy with this licence - I'm sure it'll be ok but will come back to confirm. If someone could suggest appropriate wording to give him credit in the article I'd be grateful. Or are photos not credited - sorry, I'm new to the etiquette here. Dooley 04:34, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've confirmed with my friend and he is happy to release so as to allow others to copy. Dooley 16:26, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination withdrawn. Supporting summary provided. -Thanks Nv8200p talk 18:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by S0crates9 (notify). OR UE —Wknight94 (talk) 14:46, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Although this image at the time of writing may improperly be used in the article Wong Jim, it is being properly used at the time of writing in the article Apple Daily. Perhaps it could be removed from the Wong Jim article but allowed to stay in the Apple Daily article. Jecowa 08:50, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]