Uploaded by
Live Forever (notify |
contribs). (Not an orphan) TV screenshot from a news show for the purpose of illustrating the subject of the news show (racist vandalism). There is no commentary on the news show itself or the TV station itself. Nor, for that matter, does the description page even tell us what news show this screenshot came from, failing
WP:FAIR#Policy #10.
BigDT00:24, 28 December 2006 (UTC)reply
I think that the filename is actually just the English translation of the vandalism displayed in the image. At any rate, that itself isn't a huge concern ... there's no way to rename files, but we can always reupload it, then delete the old one if such a need were to ever arise. The real problem is that taking a screenshot to illustrate the subject of the screenshot is never fair use.
BigDT00:43, 28 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Comment The station is BHT1, the state television, and the show is the general news program Dnevnik ("the Daily"). The problem could easily be avoided by using the picture as an example of Anti-Bosniak sentiment's prevalence in modern Bosnia-Herzegovina, as reflected through its media. For instnace, "A Dnevnik newscast from BHT1 shows anti-Bosniak graffiti in Banja Luka. The phenomenon frequently comes up in local media", or something like that.
Live Forever00:24, 30 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Uploaded by
SlimVirgin (notify |
contribs). (Not an orphan) Non-free image of
Ron Karenga, the founder of
Kwanzaa. The image description page has no rationale, but cannot be speedied because it was uploaded in 2005. This picture is taken from
[1] - a website that deals with African American history. There is no reasonable fair use justification for this image.
BigDT01:46, 28 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Delete - but note that being pornographic nor commercial are valid reasons for deletion. My !vote is because it has no license (it would be fair use anyways), the content of the image or the DVD itself was not discussed in the article when added by the uploader and finally it is currently orphaned.--
Gay Cdn(talk)(Contr.)18:39, 28 December 2006 (UTC)reply
These photos taken by
DarkFireTaker (
talk·contribs) all have rater glaring photo credits embeded in them in violaion of
Wikipedia:Image use policy. I asked him to upload non-watermarked versions about a month ago, but he does not seem to be around anymore (he's only made one edit since then), so I guess we should just delete them. Most of them at unused anyway. --
Sherool(talk)11:11, 28 December 2006 (UTC)reply
The lack of a fair use claim doesn't mean that it fails a fair use test. It's a historic event that can't be repeated. As for a source, I believe it's a CNN video, but I'm not sure. I didn't post it.—
Slipgrid23:02, 29 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Converting someone elses work into an animated GIF does not produce a new copyright, the user is basicaly trying to remove all rights from someone elses work. Only the person who actaly shot this footage (or those he may have sold the rights to) have the power to release this or any other derived works into the public domain. --
Sherool(talk)14:32, 30 December 2006 (UTC)reply
No it's not even close to beeing a unique new work. If you want to claim it's fair use go right ahead, but there are scertain formatlities that need to be adressed per Wikipedia's rules if you do (such as, you know putting a fair use template on it, writing a fair use rationale, giving the real source (who hold the copyright to the original fottage) etc), without with it would still get speedy deleted within a week. See
Wikipedia:Fair use criteria and
Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images/Media. --
Sherool(talk)14:43, 31 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Well I agree it is low quality but I didn't realise it was still around. The article it was part of was deleted a long time ago. --
Candlewicke Consortiums Limited
20:50, 28 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Comment - this image is not an orphan and as such, notice should have been applied to the article where the image is used - part of the three step process of IfD nomination. I have added the tag.--
Gay Cdn(talk)(Contr.)21:25, 28 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Comment - this image is not an orphan and as such, notice should have been applied to the article where the image is used - part of the three step process of IfD nomination. I have added the tag.--
Gay Cdn(talk)(Contr.)21:31, 28 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Comment - this image is not an orphan and as such, notice should have been applied to the article where the image is used - part of the three step process of IfD nomination. I have added the tag--
Gay Cdn(talk)(Contr.)21:34, 28 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Comment - this image is not an orphan and as such, notice should have been applied to the article where the image is used - part of the three step process of IfD nomination. I have added the tag.--
Gay Cdn(talk)(Contr.)21:37, 28 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Comment - I stubled upon this image, which I find to be the most apropriat for the article if not the best, at Yahoo news, it was an AP photo, it was dated December 8, 2006, I tryed finding that specific news article again to add the source from where I uploaded it but couldn't find it again. I do not understand that much which tags should be put with which picture, but I think that this image shouldn't be deleted because it is realy good for the article in which it has been put. I think that other users have also uploaded images from the Asociated Press so put a tag that fits this image, but I can not put the source of the image, I tryed to find that article again but just couldn't find it.--
Top Gun 23:26 28 December 2006
Comment -
I have changed the tag to this one which I think is more apropriat.
{{Non-free fair use in}}
Rationale: Website publishes photographs with no apparent attempts at copyright, no loss of commercial viability, photographs seem to have been implicitly released for widespread public consumption with no interest in authorship rights, no suitable alternatives available to illustrate the subject.