File talk:Ernest Lowell; William Lowell, senior.; and William Lowell, junior.gif

What is the deletion reason, it meets fair use.

• It might meet fair use, but only if you mention everything on the file page that would prove that. If you think it's fair use, add {{Non-free use rationale}} and specify your fair use claim. I tagged this for deletion because the rationale was not good enough for the file to meet WP:NFCC. Magog reverted my edit to change the deletion reason to a "disputed fair use rationale." That was my mistake. But if you use the template and fill in the parameters to make a fair use claim, we'll go from there and see if it's acceptable or not. —Jsayre64 (talk) 19:38, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

So the plan is to delete images when some newer template comes along, and the older images don't have the newest prettiest template? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 19:51, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

That all depends on what you type when you upload each file. If you don't want it deleted you better use the template, and you better hurry because if it stays like this someone will delete it. I can't delete it. I'm not an administrator. So I suggest you stop asking rhetorical questions and save the image if you want to save it. Jsayre64 (talk) 20:01, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

To be fair, Richard, your rationale does not address several of the issues required at WP:NCI (e.g., replaceability). Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:40, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

You seem to know the secret word your looking for in the rationale, I can only guess. How about you considering a lifestyle change? Instead of deleting what irritates you, make the change yourself. Ask yourself: is your goal to delete as much as possible, or have a good reference work. Your spending twice the number of keystrokes to have the image deleted than in adding whatever secret word is that you are looking to have in the rationale. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 02:57, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

There's no "secret word." Look: the template has parameters in which you're supposed to write a description of the image, its source, the article(s) you'll use it in, the portion used, the resolution, the purpose of use (most important), whether there is a free equivalent or whether one could be created, and any other information to support the whole rationale. You know all this, because you've used this template often in other images you've uploaded. I barely know anything about what this image depicts or what the article tied to it is about. But you know. You know the purpose of use, unless you want to tell me and I'll add it, but it would make no difference. Jsayre64 (talk) 04:15, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Of course you know what you secret words you thought were missing, you just told me them. You could of added them too. It isn't a contest to see who can delete the most from Wikipedia. When the newest wording and the newest template comes along add them, don't delete. If the policy is to just delete each time a prettier template comes along, then there is no point fixing it in 2010 because in 2020 a newer template will come along or a new secret word will have to be added. If the policy wont be "fix first" before deletion, there is no point adding, and that is exactly what the Library of Congress determined when they partnered with Flickr and not Wikimedia Commons.

I'm not the one who placed the deletion notice, Richard. In fact, I did exactly what you recommended above on a different image of yours, and advised J64 to do the same. And he told you above the proper template that contains all of the necessary parts to include for non-free fair use - if you had spent half the time typing your complaint as just adding the damned template, it would not be deleted. To J64 - the template you want is {{subst:dfu}}, which is different than the one you've been adding. Magog the Ogre (talk) 06:32, 26 November 2010 (UTC)