Commons:Deletion requests/File:313983 b59282a90b o.jpg

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

This flickr account appears to be orphaned and the uploader is long gone. There is no way to show that it was indeed licensed freely and the photo is used on only 2 wikipedia articles. So, little loss to Commons here. Leoboudv (talk) 07:40, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Long gone? Did you, by any chance, note my involvement in sister projects? This photo is an element of an archived news story on Wikinews. Deletion on Commons would constitute harm to that project's value as a historical archive. (Image was licensed in 2005 with CC-sa 1.0, and license has been altered since.) - Amgine (talk) 20:30, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Its nice to know that you are not long gone after all. There are many old images which are uploaded on a license which is today unfree but no one is sure if it was free at upload and they have indeed left Commons. If this was uploaded on a free license, perhaps you should have uploaded it via FlickrLickr to prove it was free then? Anyway, I have no objections to  Keeping this image now. I withdraw my DR here. --Leoboudv (talk) 20:46, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No commercial licence is not allowed there... but how could we verify if the file licence has been change or not ? Otourly (talk) 20:49, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That is hard... Image is also on http://ipbt.blogspot.com/2004/08/train-2.html and it seems it was also nc there in 2005 [1] but that does not mean that it could not have been on Flickr with at free license. Any other suggestions? If not we have to decide if there is any reason not to trust uploader misread license. Uploader seems sure and is an active wiki user. I would prefer on Commons though. --MGA73 (talk) 21:14, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: Both Otourly and MGA raise serious questions. How do we know if it was free. The flickr account is likely orphaned for years now. This is another difficult DR. --Leoboudv (talk) 00:37, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Update. The uploader has made a clear comment on the license here He/She maintains it was cc by sa at upload. I think...since one is dealing with an orphaned flickr account that it is OK to accept the uploader's word here and  Keep since the uploader is very confident of the license at upload. --Leoboudv (talk) 02:12, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
His email seems to be this slmably<at>student.cs.uwaterloo.ca . --Túrelio (talk) 22:35, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kept, Amgine (talk · contribs) is a trusted contributor, and has verified over private communication that the image in question was suitable for upload at the time. –blurpeace (talk) 00:35, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]