Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2007 February 27
February 27
edit
- appears to be professional image MECU≈talk 02:24, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- appears to be a professional image MECU≈talk 02:24, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- - uploaded by XxEugeniexx (notify | contribs).
- Orphan, probably unencyclopedic, no licensing information, user's only contribution. —Bkell (talk) 02:43, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphan, if deemed encyclopedic would be better as a real table. —Bkell (talk) 02:47, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- - uploaded by RonaldMcDizzle (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic - used for image vandalism. RJASE1 Talk 03:44, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Landau-Hotel (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, license has some restrictions so not completely free MECU≈talk 03:45, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- OB (Image:Indiana 265.svg), LQ — V60 VTalk · VDemolitions · Editor review 2! 04:40, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Manaskumar (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned, Low quality. (not work safe) RJASE1 Talk 05:15, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphan, unencyclopedic, uploader's only contribution (except for the following image). —Bkell (talk) 06:31, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphan, no description of notability, uploader's only contribution (except for the previous image). —Bkell (talk) 06:31, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphan, redundant to Image:Flag of Macedonia 1991-95.svg. —Bkell (talk) 07:07, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphan, redundant to Image:Flag of Macedonia 1991-95.svg. —Bkell (talk) 07:09, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphan, identical to Image:Ascension of christ.JPG on the Commons. —Bkell (talk) 07:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphan, seems to have been replaced by Image:Flag-map of FYR Macedonia.svg. —Bkell (talk) 07:38, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphan, no encyclopedic use. —Bkell (talk) 07:45, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphan, no encyclopedic use. —Bkell (talk) 07:46, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphan, no encyclopedic use. —Bkell (talk) 07:50, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphan, no encyclopedic use. —Bkell (talk) 07:51, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphan, no encyclopedic use. —Bkell (talk) 07:52, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphan, no encyclopedic use, apparently superseded by Image:Vlatko Safe(AR).png. —Bkell (talk) 07:54, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
- - uploaded by Keffykefka (notify | contribs).
- Copyrighted image used without permission, violates fair use, offensive naming ('Lesbo' is derogatory) and listing — CaveatLectorTalk 08:01, 27 February 2007 (UTC).
- Delete, yep, this image includes a copyrighted National Organization for Women logo, but is not being used in accordance with wikipedia:fair use policy. — coelacan talk — 17:33, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- Modify, i don't know if that's an option, but can't it just be de-offensified? surely a use can be found for the image. --emerson7 | Talk 21:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- The only place it can be used legally is on the National Organization for Women page, which already has one logo. There's no particular reason to use the logo twice and doing so would probably be a violation of wp:fair use (because to claim fair use we only need to illustrate the logo once). — coelacan talk — 21:41, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- Copyrighted image used without permission, violates fair use. In addition, it lacks a source of where they found it. Someone made the printed image into a computer file and it doesn't credit the person who did that -- citing source they found it is necessary for fair use. — SakotGrimshine 08:18, 27 February 2007 (UTC).
- - uploaded by Pablo Vergés (notify | contribs).
- Unencyclopedic. Futhermore, picture was uploaded without the depicted persons' consent — Dlorch 09:29, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- - uploaded by StuFifeScotland (notify | contribs).
- Unencyclopedic, logically flawed. When I inserted it at Monty Hall problem a big argument ensued. Gazpacho 09:40, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Ryan.G.Woods (notify | contribs).
- unencyclopedic, no articles link to it. --Jay†Litman 13:41, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Ryan.G.Woods (notify | contribs).
- unencyclopedic, no articles link to it. --Jay†Litman 13:41, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Low quality. (not work safe) RJASE1 Talk 13:44, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic, Low quality. (not work safe) RJASE1 Talk 13:46, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Low quality, Unencyclopedic. (not work safe) RJASE1 Talk 13:47, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Low quality, Unencyclopedic. (not work safe) RJASE1 Talk 13:51, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Low quality, Unencyclopedic. (not work safe) RJASE1 Talk 13:52, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Low quality, Unencyclopedic. (not work safe) RJASE1 Talk 13:53, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Low quality, Unencyclopedic. (not work safe) RJASE1 Talk 13:54, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Low quality, Unencyclopedic. (not work safe) RJASE1 Talk 13:56, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Low quality, Unencyclopedic. (not work safe) RJASE1 Talk 13:57, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Low quality, Unencyclopedic. (not work safe) RJASE1 Talk 14:00, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Low quality, Unencyclopedic. (not work safe) RJASE1 Talk 14:02, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Scimmie2002 (notify | contribs).
- Mislabelled as PD; it's from a sales brochure. Replaceable. Annoying URL in the image. Soon to be orphaned. Lewis Collard 15:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Scimmie2002 (notify | contribs).
- No licensing information. Scan of a sales brochure. Replaceable. Annoying URL in the image. Soon to be orphaned. Lewis Collard 15:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Scimmie2002 (notify | contribs).
- Mislabelled as PD. Scan of a sales brochure. Replaceable. Annoying URL in the image. Soon to be orphaned. Lewis Collard 15:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Scimmie2002 (notify | contribs).
- Mislabelled as PD. Scan of a sales brochure. Replaceable. Annoying URL in the image. Soon to be orphaned. Lewis Collard 15:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Scimmie2002 (notify | contribs).
- Mislabelled as PD. Scan of a sales brochure. Replaceable. Annoying URL in the image. Soon to be orphaned. Lewis Collard 15:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Scimmie2002 (notify | contribs).
- No licensing information. Scan of a sales brochure. Replaceable. Annoying URL in the image. Soon to be orphaned. Lewis Collard 15:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Scimmie2002 (notify | contribs).
- No licensing information. Scan of a sales brochure. Replaceable. Annoying URL in the image. Soon to be orphaned. Lewis Collard 15:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Scimmie2002 (notify | contribs).
- No licensing information. Scan of a sales brochure. Replaceable. Annoying URL in the image. Soon to be orphaned. Lewis Collard 15:09, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Scimmie2002 (notify | contribs).
- No licensing information. Scan of a sales brochure. Replaceable. Annoying URL in the image. Soon to be orphaned. Lewis Collard 15:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Scimmie2002 (notify | contribs).
- No licensing information. Scan of press photo. Might be replaceable. If not, it needs to be rescanned to get rid of the annoying URL in the image. Soon to be orphaned.Lewis Collard 15:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Scimmie2002 (notify | contribs).
- Replaceable fair use. Annoying URL in the image. Soon to be orphaned. Lewis Collard 15:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic (not work safe). RJASE1 Talk 17:33, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic (not work safe). RJASE1 Talk 17:48, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. This image in an instructive example of the subject, especially in the context of the variations gallery. There is no mention in the deletion policy of "not work safe" as a justification for deletion. It's no more "unsafe" than the other images on that page, most of which have not been flagged for deletion. Also, not orphaned given its inclusion in said article. 70.20.210.26 13:25, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Latinflava (notify | contribs).
- Orphaned, Unencyclopedic (not work safe). RJASE1 Talk 17:50, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. This image in an instructive example of the subject, especially in the context of the variations gallery. There is no mention in the deletion policy of "not work safe" as a justification for deletion. It's no more "unsafe" than the other images on that page, most of which have not been flagged for deletion. Also, not orphaned given its inclusion in said article. 70.20.210.26 13:27, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- This image is tagged as {{promo}}, and the description says it "has been released by WB to promote their work.".But the image's source is stated as thewb.com, a site containing images but not for promotional reuse. Their images are not intended to be uploaded in other websites "promoting" their products. Their terms of use states "Using any Material on any other web site or networked computer environment is prohibited."- Abu badali (talk) 18:45, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Before becoming the CW network the WB site linked press kits (w/promotional photos) to the bios of their most prominent actors and actresses. Additionally, US copyright allows the use of copyrighted material to illustrate a "work or product being discussed". The uploaded photo is of the actresses Rose McGowan portraying the character Paige Matthews from the television show Charmed. Since the photo is only used in the article for Paige Matthews, to illustrate the characrer being discussed, it falls within fair-use rights within the United States. Jhurlburt 06:51, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'm afraid you're mistaken. We would be o.k. if the "work or product being discussed" was the image itself. That is, if the image was notable enough to deserve some discussion in the article, we would be allowed to use it. But as we're using the image to illustrate an webpage about "Paige Matthews" we're directly competing with CW Network in the "webpages about Paige Matthews" business, and should not be using their work without permission. --Abu badali (talk) 07:10, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
The article is about a character and the picture depicts that character. US Code TITLE 17 > CHAPTER 1 > § 107 Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use states that, "the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright". The image also meets Wikipedia's requirements for fair use in that it is used only in an article about the character in question. Since the image was released as part of a media kit, references its origins, retains the watermark of the WB and promotes the work in question its use is allowed. Since the character of Paige Matthews is owned by its respective owners no picture of the character can be obtained that is not copyrighted therefore no free use image is possible. Jhurlburt 23:08, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- You said: "Since the image was released as part of a media kit". No, this image was not released as part of a media kit. The CW Network website is not a media kit. They're not a source for images to be used by the media. It's images are part of the site's value, and when we use their images in some website without permission, we are attacking the CW's site's value.
- The law you mentioned makes it ok to use that image when talking about the image itself (or maybe talking about the CW Network site), but not about the image's content (i.e., the character). --Abu badali (talk) 17:39, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Thing is, we are not talking about the CW network website but the old WB network website. The fact that the CW network does not provide links to media/press kits with promotional photos of their shows has nothing to do with the situation at hand. Jhurlburt 18:34, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Were they really "media/press kits with promotional photos" or simply "pages with photos, but whose terms of use prohibit usage in other places?". Putting it simple, can anyone provide any evidence that this image is really for media reuse? A link to the old "old WB network website"'s terms of use would be wonderful. --Abu badali (talk) 20:39, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
I've tried Google's cache but unfortunately it's already expired. The Internet Archive has some parts of the old WB website archived but it's spotty at best, half the links and graphics don't work and it's slow as dirt. If someone wants to spend the time digging through the site be my guest, I've already put more effort into this matter than it deserves. I followed the terms that were required to use the image (i.e. didn't alter the image, remove the WB watermark, used it in a manner that promoted the show and referenced the URL) and have tried the best to follow Wikipedia's own rules regarding the use of fair use images. What can I say.... websites change.... all the time. If this is a problem then Wikipedia is going to need to mirror every image or website mentioned in every Wikipedia article, just in case. Jhurlburt 01:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- what about using a screenshot? --Abu badali (talk) 07:05, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
- Originally was the image on an article about a new search engine that was deleted after some hullabaloo around it. Image is not linked to anything at the time of nomination. — Dennisthe2 18:48, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- - uploaded by (Automated conversion) = (notify | contribs).
- obsoleted by Image:Mackinac Island topo.png — Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 22:51, 27 February 2007 (UTC).
- Orphaned, also very old and low quality. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 00:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- - uploaded by Scimmie2002 (notify | contribs).
- Probably not PD since it came from a sales brochure, and it has an obnoxious URL in the center of the image. —Bkell (talk) 23:20, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Orphan, unencyclopedic, seems like it was uploaded to disparage the person in the picture. — Epimorph 23:53, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
