Wikipedia:Private photos of identifiable models

This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference.
Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump.

This page is a scratchpad for ideas about what a proposed policy should be for pictures of models in sexual poses or other poses where they may be unhappy about having their photo put on to wikipedia. Please be bold in editing.

This proposed policy is a way of dealing with sensitive photographs of models who may not be happy about having a photograph of themselves illustrating a Wikipedia article. It is intended to cover:

Sexual photographs or photographs of people who may reasonably expect that the picture would remain private when the photo was taken.
Photographs of minors in a situation from which personal information could be ascertained or in a fashion about the appearance on Wikipedia of which parents or legal guardians are likely to be unhappy.

It is not intended to cover:

Famous people
Pictures taken in a public place or pictures taken where the model has no reasonable expectation of the photo remaining private.
Pictures where the model is not identifiable.
Pictures where the model is no longer living.

In photographs that are covered by this policy, Wikipedia requires that the model (or the model's parent or guardian in the case of a minor) gives permission for the photo to remain on Wikipeda.

This policy is not intended to trump other wikipedia image use policies. Even if the model is happy for the photo to appear here, if the copyright is dubious or the picture is not encylopedic then it can and should be deleted. One way to avoid having to consider this policy is to crop images to remove the face or identifiable features if appropriate.

General arguments about implementing such a policy

Reasons for

Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons

Reasons against

Content triggers

When would the content of a photo trigger the application of a higher standard? When any of these conditions are met, applying a higher standard of proof of permission is probably warranted.

Is the model identifiable from the photo: How much of the model is visible, and is the face visible?
Is the model "compromised" by the photo?
1. Is the model shown doing something illegal in any of the jurisdictions of Wikipedia?
2. Is the model shown doing something that would cause ridicule or professional harm, if he or she were identified?
Is the model potentially under the highest age of consent in any Wikipedia jurisdiction?
Is a portion of the model's body visible that would be considered inappropriate in public (as Wikipedia is "in public")?

These all apply strictly to the images themselves.

Notes: 1) Identification is usually facial, but use common sense. You could put a black bar across the eyes of Paris Hilton, and folks would still know who it is. Generally, only celebrities (see above) are identifiable without the face, but it is impossible to be absolute. 2.1) Illegal includes acts of violence and all forms of criminality, provided that it is not a famous figure (e.g. Patty Hearst as "Tanya"). 2.2) Lingerie might well cause professional harm for some, just as even professional acts (e.g. animal husbandry) might. Use common sense. 3) If it's possible that the model is below the age of consent, let's be sure of ourselves, whether the model is nude or clothed or anything else.

Historically, pictures such as the various photographic illustrations of the vagina have been battlegrounds, and the uploaders indeed have gone to extraordinary lengths to assure the community that the images were licit. Therefore, it is not without precedent that images that are potentially more socially (as opposed to merely psychologically) damaging meet such a requirement.

Ideas for how we can verify permission

Model release form

We need some kind of model release form. It could be downloaded and signed by the model then scanned in and emailed to the foundation.

Photograph of the model holding a "GFDL" sign

The person in the "permission" photo should be clearly the same as the person in other relevant photos.

The sign must obviously be legible and should refer specifically to the permission for other relevant photos, e.g. "GFDL given for 3 nude photos of myself". The sign should specify:

What license the photos will be under
How many photos are released
The subject matter if of an explicit nature

Proof of source for all images is required

Proof of source for all images is required. Provide a website or identify who you are in real life.