Talk:Will Work for Food (album)

Fair use rationale for Image:UncleSlamWorkFood.jpg

Image:UncleSlamWorkFood.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 16:05, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Challenged prod

@Walter Görlitz: For deleted challenged prods, they are almost always on WP:REFUND. In this case that's where the request was to reverse the deletion. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

@Graeme Bartlett: REFUND is not the issue, although, we really should have some actual criteria for refunding not someone who does not know what Wikipedia's criteria for notability disrupting a perfectly good system, but that's not the issue. I requested that a link to the request be supplied, or at least linking to the user's IP. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:15, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

The IP number was listed when I removed the prod, and on the log entry for the undelete. Being IPv6 probably means that you cannot meaningfully leave them any kind of message though, as they tend to change form use to use. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:26, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes it was, but not linked. I don't care about a discussion with the IP but this sort "it's notable" without supplying proof is a waste of time. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:07, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

@Graeme Bartlett: I trust no further unsupported refund requests will be permitted now that it has gone through an AfD. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:55, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Requests are permitted, but they will be declined. Unless there is plenty of proof the AFD was addressed properly. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:47, 23 March 2021 (UTC)