I don't understand, I mean, it's the same image in a different format. But whatever, just be sure to change the image in {{Rhode_Island-State-Highway-stub}} first. --
Tckma 01:27, 18 October 2006 (UTC)reply
This photo was provided in media releases and was posted here with the written consent of the President of the company. It depicts the first installation in a permanent NFL game site. While the Rogers Center picture is of a site that has field turf installed it is not the focus of the image, nor is it in the image from the NFC Championship game. --
Coz 19:43, 18 October 2006 (UTC)reply
The Rogers Center picture is an adequate illustration of
FieldTurf—in fact, it is much more detailed than the Qwest Field aerial photo. The company giving permission to use their unfree image has no bearing on the issue;
WP:FUP states: "Always use a more free alternative if one is available."
Punctured Bicycle 20:11, 18 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Comment: It's been tagged as nothing but {{promotional}} since it was uploaded on the English Wikipedia.
Dread Lord CyberSkull✎☠ 09:13, 18 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Comment, good point, it's likely deletable by the
WP:FUC. I IfD'd this when too tired, clearly. See criteria 4 and 10, which a tracing fails. --
Consumed Crustacean (
talk) 15:53, 18 October 2006 (UTC)reply
These are all orhanded. They where only used on his userpage wich I speedy deleted as blatant advertising for his "book of prophesies" or whatever it was. --
Sherool(talk) 11:06, 18 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Uploaded by
Lamarewalker (notify |
contribs). Orphanded, possible copyvio (tagged as self made, but looks like a promo or media shot)-
Sherool(talk) 11:56, 18 October 2006 (UTC)reply
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: replaced by free image and deleted as orphan. RadioKirk (
u|
t|
c) 19:07, 23 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Please see
talk for further discussion. My arguments: one,
WP:FUC #1 is satisfied (the word "reasonably" was recently removed—incorrectly, in my view—and there's a massive difference between "difficult" and "when was the last time
Lindsay Lohan was available for a free image?"); two,
WP:FU#Counterexamples #8 does not apply if
WP:FUC #8 is met (specific to identification of article subject). I must ask that any editors involved in this Ifd take considerable care when working toward a decision; this will affect virtually every fair-use image of every "celebrity" on Wikipedia. RadioKirk (
u|
t|
c) 14:51, 18 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Comment: Unfree images of celebrities are already being deleted in ifd under FUC#1. Wikipedia has a lot of free images of celebrities and imho, the only reason we don't have even more, is because it's simply easier to grab an unfree publicity shot from the internet. --
Abu Badali 16:12, 18 October 2006 (UTC)reply
And, it's wrong. By targeting legitimate promotional images together with those incorrectly tagged as promotional, editors have created a baby-with-the-bathwater effect that will have a massive impact on the entire encyclopedia. I cannot state my opinion forcefully enough—this is going too far, and it is wrong. RadioKirk (
u|
t|
c) 16:22, 18 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Don't Delete As far as I'm concerned, fair use pictures should only be removed if there is a free equivalent.--
CyberGhostface 15:13, 18 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Comment: I'm affraid you're mistaken. Unfree images are only kept if a free equivalent is not available nor could be created. See #1 on
WP:FUC. This used to be a gray area, but
WP:FU has been updated to clarify this matter. --
Abu Badali 16:12, 18 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Abu is correct. We cannot use "fair use" photos of living celebrities on Wikipedia, as it violates our first fair use criterion. Jimbo has said on multiple occasions that "fair use" images should not be used when a free alternative could possibly be made. I understand that CyberGhostface strongly disagrees with our policy, but it's still our policy. –
Quadell(
talk) (
random) 12:03, 19 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Then, once again, it needs to be re-rewritten per the
discussion currently under way. The recent changes are too strict; there needs to be a reasonable expectation that the average Wikipedian can create an image and, for some living celebs, that's more than just "difficult". RadioKirk (
u|
t|
c) 12:57, 19 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Buiding a free content encyclopedia is more than just "difficult". --
Abu Badali 15:53, 19 October 2006 (UTC)reply
The current stricter text was written by one of Wikipedia's lawyers and explicitly approved by Jimbo and the rest of the foundation. It isn't likely to change. And under these guidelines, the image must be deleted. Sorry. –
Quadell(
talk) (
random) 14:39, 20 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Well, you'll forgive me then if I continue to fight this, tooth and nail. :) RadioKirk (
u|
t|
c) 15:39, 20 October 2006 (UTC)reply
But please, "combat" the policy at the policy page. Not the policy application. Your dislikeness for the policy is not a valid reason for not deleting this image. --
Abu Badali 20:19, 20 October 2006 (UTC):::reply
Fix the policy, save the image... RadioKirk (
u|
t|
c) 20:30, 20 October 2006 (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 article's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was
Uploaded by
Sosomk (notify |
contribs). 1. unencyclopedic more suited for propaganda publication, not encyclopedia; 2. unused and unusable; 3. copyvio as it is based on copyrighted AP photo
Irpen 21:04, 18 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Delete as copyvio of an AP image, unencyclopedic and inflammatory. --
Grafikm(AutoGRAF) 21:08, 18 October 2006 (UTC)reply
I speedy deleted it as an attack page
Alex Bakharev 23:09, 18 October 2006 (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 article's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.