File talk:Non-free image showing that while in US custody, Tarek Dergoul lost an arm and a big toe.jpg
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of a fair use image as a replaceable image. Please do not modify it.
The result was to delete the image.
 | This orphaned talk page, subpage, image page, or similar is not eligible for speedy deletion under CSD G8 as it has been asserted to be useful to Wikipedia. If you believe it should be deleted, please nominate it on Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion. |
 | It is disputed whether this file violates our non-free content criteria. The reason given is: While Dergoul agreed to pose for this non-free picture in 2007, six years have passed, and various incidents make clear he is completely unwilling to have any pictures taken, if he can possibly avoid it. So, the suggestion he will agree to pose for a "free" picture is clearly baseless wishful thinking. On January 12, 2012, the 10th anniversary of the opening of the Guantanamo camp, The Guardian gathered former UK captives from the camp, to speak about the continued detention of Shaker Aamer, the one UK resident still in the camp. Dergoul declined to appear with the other men, in a group photo, or to repeat his abuse complaints. On August 5, 2011 Dergoul physically attacked a parking official, who inadvertently included him in a picture of a car whose meter had expired. Closing administrator: if the decision is to Keep the file please put {{Old replaceable non-free use}} on the file description page. If the decision is to Delete please archive the discussion on the talk page between {{subst:Archive top}} and {{subst:Archive bottom}} and delete the file page. |
He is still alive, so it is possible to take photos of him. Besides, the photo comes from a commercial source (The Guardian) which is obviously selling licences for the photo to other sources (Daily Mail), so the image additionally violates WP:NFCC#2. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:36, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
- I forgot to mention, many WP:RS assert that he had multiple toes amputated. To contradict those RS, and insert a text description that says he only lost a single toe, opens one up to concerns over WP:Original research.
- If you are disagreeing with my use of the {{di-replaceable}} tag aren't you supposed to initiate a discussion where additional people are more likely to weigh in?
- WRT WP:NFCC#2 -- how exactly is a use here, under a fair use claim, replacing the original newspaper's "original market role"? Are we trying to sell the image? No. Have we obfuscated the original copyright status of the image? No. So we aren't interfering with individuals or organizations who would want to legitimately license this image from doing so. Geo Swan (talk) 01:05, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
- The WP:RS issue can be solved by simply linking to the article from Daily Mail since that article contains the image.
- The original market role of the photo seems to include that The Guardian sells copies of the photo for use on websites, as you see on the Daily Mail website. Wikipedia is a website. By using the image on this website without paying, this use replaces the original market role (using the image on websites and paying). That is exactly what WP:NFC#UUI ยง7 is based upon. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:52, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.
