The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media 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 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 media's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media 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.
Keep. It is not clear whether this an AP photo (might as well be Ansa, see
[1], or Reuters, see:
[2]), it is taken from
Italian State Police site, which in my view makes it PD. Probably it is a police photo distributed by several photo agencies. (See for instance the mugshot
Image:Salvatore_LoPiccolo.jpg from the
Italian police most wanted list, which appears as a Ansa photo in
[3]) Versions of this photo or similar ones are all over Internet. I don't see the urgency to delete it. I think it is important to keep it to illustrate (1) the arrest of Lo Piccolo and (2) to show the difference with the photofit which is in the article as well. I think that is sufficient reason for fair use. What free photo are you talking about, anyway? If the mysterious free photo does illustrate the above as well I have no problem to replace it. Maybe you can make it available somewhere. (See also my comments
here) -
Mafia Expert18:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)reply
We generally can't use photos of living people; this is due to our
Foundation licensing resolution. We also can't use AP (or other press agency) photos except in very rare cases of critical commentary on iconic images. There is no evidence that this image was taken by the Italian police, and it would not be a free image even if it were. The free image I referred to is
this one, which was tagged as public domain at the time of my comment, until you changed it to be use the {{mugshot}} tag. Unfortunately, if that image is not free, then we probably can't use it either, since the person is still living. –
Quadell(
talk) (
random)20:17, 4 December 2007 (UTC)reply
Maybe you could consider reading
WP:NFC: photos from a press agencies are not permitted unless the photo itself is the subject of sourced commentary in the article. The photos are discussed in the text and with some good faith and leniency might apply for above mentioned exception. -
Mafia Expert (
talk)
21:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC)reply
Or consider this:
Fair use is a doctrine in United States copyright law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as use for scholarship or review. I think this also applies. Unless you think Wikipedia has no scholarly purpose. I think there is sufficient leeway, in particular because the three images are discussed in the text in relation to each other. -
Mafia Expert (
talk)
22:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC)reply
While it's true Wikipedia's quality would be vastly improved if all non-free images were removed, I don't actually argue to delete those that are in compliance with current policy. This one isn't. It's an image of living person being used only to show what he looks like; there's no critical commentary relating specifically to this very photograph; and it's a non-iconic image from a news agency. —
AngrIf you've written a quality article...19:59, 6 December 2007 (UTC)reply
There is a critical commentary and a reference to the images in the article. Read something before you put down your preconceived opinions. -
Mafia Expert (
talk)
20:19, 6 December 2007 (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 media's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media 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.
Keep and delete Farragut0a.jpg; this one does a better job of showing what the ship looks like, while in the Farragut pic the saucer hides everything.
TomTheHand19:16, 4 December 2007 (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 media's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Unfree image of a living person, which was uploaded and used in violation of
WP:NFCC#1. The given fair use template states that this image is used "for identification and critical commentary on the station ID or program and its contents", but it is very clear that the image is only intended for use in the article about the person, to show how she looks like (the image is not used in the article about the TV program and will probably never be, as it doesn't show any discerning features of this program). The added claim "no free equivalent is available or could be created" is totally without evidence, as this person is alive and active.
High on a tree (
talk)
22:35, 4 December 2007 (UTC)reply
Free use
image:USS Enterprise NCC 1701B.jpg should replace this non-free image. Though I don't care for this other image, and like the other image better, I am afraid that if a free-use alternative is available, we have to use it instead of the non-free use image. If someone knows of some policy that says we can keep this one, by all means, add it in here.
Ejfetters (
talk)
23:49, 4 December 2007 (UTC)reply
Redundant non-free use - we already have 2 images of the Excelsior class in the article, no need for a 3rd. NCC1701Bdrydock.jpg can suffice, if that is ultimately deleted, USS Enterprise 1701B.jpg will suffice on its own. Every angle of the ship is not needed.
Ejfetters (
talk)
23:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)reply
No evidence for the claim that this "is a work of the United States Federal Government". On the contrary, the web site which is given as source
states: "Digitized photos, graphics and logos on the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis' web site are the property of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis and may not be used without written permission". (According to the article
Federal Reserve System, these banks are private institutions which are not part of the U.S. government.)
High on a tree (
talk)
23:59, 4 December 2007 (UTC)reply