Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:48, 13 February 2008

Image:Wearethebananasplits.jpg

Hi Hammersoft,

I saw your comment on Melesse's talk page, and I wanted to drop by to let you know that, while it seems to me that she's trying to do you a favor by changing the fair use rationale to point to your temporary userspace page, the fact is that per Item 9 of WP:NFCC and WP:UP#Images on user pages, non-free images are simply not allowed in user space. As such, I suggest you either move the article to the article namespace or replace the image with something like Example.jpg in the meantime. While the latter may result in the image being deleted, you are more than welcome to upload a new copy once your article is ready for prime time.

I hope this helps to clear things up. I'll refrain from tagging the rationale as bad until you've had a chance to address these issues; please let me know if you have any questions! --jonny-mt 08:28, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

• Hi! We've not talked before, so I know you're not familiar with my editing. I'm very well aware of fair use issues and am heavily engaged in discussions on the point in favor of fair use reduction. The image was actually used as an example in an example article as part of a discussion. My intention was to have the image and example article deleted when that aspect of the conversation wrapped up. I'll be marking both for deletion in a couple of days. Thanks for the input! --Hammersoft (talk) 16:30, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Gotcha; I had just scanned through your edit distribution to get a rough idea of your experience leve, but it seems I missed that. You might want to give the same explanation to Melesse, then, although I don't think it would hurt to leave her edit be. Thanks for the answer (and for being nice about my making a fool of myself)! --jonny-mt 01:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Image:Cassia_kiss.jpg and Image:Julia_Lemmertz.jpg

Hi Hammersoft, How come this images are left unbothered and untouched in the Russian Misplaced Pages ( & ? --Nadir D Steinmetz 17:55, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

• I don't know. One, I don't read cyrillic, two I don't read Russian, and three I can't speak for the Russian wikipedia. You're better off asking them. Here on en.wikipedia, we do not use fair use images for depicting living people, as the Foundation has taken a specific stance against such usage. See Foundation:Resolution:Licensing policy. Since the people are alive, it's conceivable that free license imagery can be obtained for celebrities. Thus, we don't use fair use images at least until the person has died. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:24, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, sorry for that. Do you think I should contact the Russian Misplaced Pages? --Nadir D Steinmetz 21:00, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

• If you want to explain to them that the use of those images is improper according to the Foundation, yes. --Hammersoft (talk) 21:01, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Thx.--Nadir D Steinmetz 21:05, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

• Sure thing. --Hammersoft (talk) 21:06, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use of album covers

Your removal of images at Margaritaville Cafe: Late Night on the grounds of "no fair use in discographies" was not warranted as the article is not a discography but clearly contains descriptions of the albums involved. In the future, please read the article before removing.

(As an aside, neither WP:NFCC nor USA copyright law specifically prohibit use of images in all discographies.) — AjaxSmack 12:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

• I'm sorry, but you're quite in the wrong. The use of fair use images in discographies is not permitted in this manner, even if you prefer this not be called a discography. The accepted means of handling this is that the album covers can appear on individual articles about each album, not on compilation/discography articles. If you would like more assistance in this matter, please contact WT:NFC. I've reverted your re-insertion. Please do not re-insert without consulting with WT:NFC first. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 13:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Good try but WP:NFC#Images does not require that each album containing an album cover image have a separate article. It allows for "cover art from various items, for identification only in the context of critical commentary of that item (not for identification without critical commentary)." In some cases, album cover images appear in articles dealing with the performer in general when such commentary exists there rather than at a separate page for each album (e.g., Jay Chou, Anggun). The commentary present for each individual album at Margaritaville Cafe: Late Night exceeds that at many album stubs (e.g., Good as Gold (album), Greatest Misses) and serves as the de facto page for the albums with each title redirecting to the appropriate section. If you have a problem with the current guidelines or find them too vague, I suggest taking it up at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Fair use. Thanks. — AjaxSmack 06:17, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

• I'm sorry, but you're quite wrong. Please take this up at WT:NFC if you disagree (which you apparently do). Before you do, I recommend you read Misplaced Pages:NFC#Images_2 which explicitly prohibits the use of fair use images in discographies for failing significance. Claiming this is not a discography is improper. In each album description, there's no more than a few sentences describing slavish information as to where it was recorded and who was on it, followed by a track listing. This is substantially, greatly different than an article on an artist which might discuss landmark albums from that artist, where such images might be useful. Here, it's slavish reproduction for depiction purposes only. That's not allowed. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:10, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use images, commentary, and discographies

A discussion continues at Misplaced Pages talk:Non-free content about fair use images, commentary, and discographies. Since you have opposed use of such images in certain articles in question there, I would appreciate some suggestions there as to what is the quota of information to qualify as commentary for use with fair-use images. I created these articles as a starting point for others to add material but would be willing to do some additional work myself if there is a clear goal that can be set. If these articles are discographies, please define the term or set some boundaries so that I will know what is a discography and what is not. Thanks. — AjaxSmack 00:20, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand

Isn't it using it for identification and description? -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 21:35, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

• If it's used on the article about the subject yes, not on userpages, no. --Hammersoft (talk) 22:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Why not? What is the rationale? -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 23:40, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

• We're a free content encyclopedia. Non-free content hurts our purposes here, and needs to be strictly limited as much as possible for a variety of reasons. One of them is legal. You do not have permission to make a sticker with the Democrat logo on it and use it as you like. Similarly, you don't have permission to use it on your userpage. This is not a fair use usage, and thus is against the law. --Hammersoft (talk) 23:55, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your help in understanding this Hammersoft. Is there a way for us to obtain a free version of this image? -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 18:14, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• No. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:18, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Why not draw our own version? Shouldn't that be enough? -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 10:41, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

• If you re-draw the logo, rights do not transfer to you. It becomes a derivative work, and the DNC retains rights. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:24, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I have a bumper sticker of it on my car... 74.136.211.15 (talk) 16:24, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• ...which you didn't make and market. --Hammersoft (talk) 16:53, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Review for Corey Worthington

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Corey Worthington. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. AW (talk) 19:16, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Is this beter ?

thumb|200px

 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alex 8194 (talk • contribs) 16:23, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

• You're STILL STILL STILL STILL STILLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL VIOLATING OUR POLICIES. If you can't abide by our policies, then stop messing with images entirely. You are NOT permitted to display fair use images on talk pages or any other pages other than articles. Now please, KNOCK IT OFF. --Hammersoft (talk) 02:44, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use of album covers 2

I asked you for comment and suggestions on a number of constructive questions, proposals and requests for clarification of WP:NFC that I posted here. I posted attempts to stimulate clarification of what "critical commentary" is and what a discography is among others. You had nothing to add to this discussion; actually nothing to say at all. It seems that your position is that no fair-use images should be used at Misplaced Pages or that a highly restrictive interpretation of WP:NFC not apparent in the text of the policy should be adhered to. That's fine but without defense of your position or good-faith willingness to engage legitimate, contructive questions of vague policy, you reversions are a claim of ownership which is itself against policy. Misplaced Pages is a community and operates on mutual engagement and not unilateral interpretations of policy not informed by group discussion. Should you wish to contribute to a clarification of WP:NFC, please use Misplaced Pages talk:Non-free content. — AjaxSmack 05:27, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

• You were told those were discographies and you were told that such usage was not permitted. You made a fallacious claim that WT:NFC supported your position, when it was quite obvious that was not the case. I specifically stayed largely removed from the discussion so that others could comment and show you were in error. Despite this, you have chosen to reinsert the images against policy. I have reverted you yet again. If you insist on continuing this re-insertion against policy, I will recommend you be blocked from further editing. I hope I'm being clear. --Hammersoft (talk) 05:35, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes you told me that those were discographies. If my claim is so obviously fallacious, why can you cite nothing to support your position? You say the article is discography but can't or won't define discography. No one else commented and showed I was in error.

If you really feel that my position is so profoundly out of sync with what the guidlelines state and what the community agrees on, please state your case and don't be shy. The WP:NFC guidlelines really could use clarification and I am engaging in constructive efforts to facilitate that (such as here). Rather than simply conducting reverts based on your personal interpretations, try to engage in some affirmative work to make the guidelines clearer and make it easier for all editors to keep from running afoul of the WPolice. I will copy this to Misplaced Pages talk:Non-free content to try and get other input as well. — AjaxSmack 23:33, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

• I'm wondering how many times it has to be said and done that we don't allow fair use album covers in discographies before it becomes common practice so far as you are concerned? This has been going on for a very, very long time. Take a look at Category:Discographies and puzzle over why soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo many of those discographies do not have album covers on them? Accident? Lack of motivation on people's parts to put album covers on them? Guess again. When you're done with that, have a look at Misplaced Pages:NFC#Images_2 which notes that the use of fair use images in discographies is not supported. Attempting to say something isn't a discography isn't helpful. It's a list of albums. Maybe its not a complete discography of the artist, but it most emphatically IS a discography. Enough of this. This has been debated God knows how many times in the past, with the result being the images are removed. Attempting to re-start discussion, yet again, when it's blatantly obvious you are in the wrong is not the right way to go about handling this. I will continue to remove images from discographies, as that is the way we do things here. --Hammersoft (talk) 23:38, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

It's not blatantly obvious that I'm right or wrong because I don't know what a discography is. Please tell me and all of the other users at Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content. And if you get some free time, check out Misplaced Pages:The role of policies in collaborative anarchy: "When the wiki collaboration is working - when people with diverse views are able to reach their own compromises and move an article forward - it is sufficient that edits are consistent with the spirit of the core policies, which may be applied with some flexibility..." — AjaxSmack 00:08, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not interested in debating this forever and ever. The collaboration on this handling of policy has already been done. We don't use album covers on discographies. Period. Look up . Read it for yourself. These are discographies. --Hammersoft (talk) 00:14, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello

I beleve, when you removed Image:Democratslogo.svg from one of my userboxes, that you were in slight error. Allow me to explain. i checked the image before its usage and found the following.

This is a scalable vector image of a copyrighted logo. All fair-use restrictions apply, but in particular this image should not be rendered any larger than is required for the purposes of identification and/or critical commentary. See Misplaced Pages:Logos.

And this is my case. I will NOT put the image back into the box without your say so, please get back to me soon. Thank-You. Yeltsinfan (talk) 19:14, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

• See WP:NFC #9. You can't have fair use images outside of the main article namespace. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:29, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Democratslogo.svg

You can't have fair use images, such as Image:Democratslogo.svg, on non-article pages. You can see WP:NFC #9. --Hammersoft (talk) 12:07, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

First, you will note that that logo is not on my UserPage. Also, the userbox under discussion has no file links listed under it.

Nonetheless, when can I expect you to notify every person currently using the Republican supporter userbox on their UserPages of the same violation? Moreover, when can I expect you to replace its image contents with the non-free image removed logo? The Republican supporter userbox uses the non-free Republican image in its design and appears, therefore to be the same offense. Here is a list of the all the persons who currently have this image on their UserPages. By my count, there are approximately 81 non-article pages that contain the non-free Republican image.

You should have no difficulty informing each of the them of their violation. Please advise when you have done so. Should you not do so, then one can only assume that your motivation, vis-à-vis the Democratic supporter userbox, was political. Just as the laws must be applied equally, so too must the wikirules and wikiregulations. Application of the wikirules and wikiregulations must be done in a nonpartisan manner. One cannot carve out a special place for supporters of that other party. — SpikeToronto (talk) 01:44, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

• I said you can not have fair use images on non-article pages. That means ALL non-article pages, including user subpages, which User:SpikeToronto/userboxes/Democratic Party is/was. As to the republican box, I already had removed a fair use image from that userbox quite some time ago, as you will note by looking at the revision history of that userbox. You will also note that the image currently on the box is not a fair use image, but a free license image. Yes, it is under discussion for deletion on Commons, but as is it is a free license image. Therefore, no violation. I'm sure you'll agree. Thanks for your time, --Hammersoft (talk) 03:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

All I see in the history is that, on November 28, 2007, you replaced the non-free fair use image in the Republican supporter userbox with a copyright violating image. To be a free-licence image, its creator actually had to have had a copyright that he could release. Just because someone redraws the first image in MS Paint doesn’t mean one suddenly acquires some unique copyright in the image that one can later release to the wikicommunity. Moreover, one notes that there is a request to delete that logo for the reasons I just mentioned: Redrawing the logo in MS Paint, that is essentially the same, lacks sufficient originality to acquire a unique copyright for its creator. Hammersoft, if you are enforcing copyright, then one can presume you knew, or ought to have known, that the new image had not acquired for its owner any new copyright and should have been treated the same as the Democratic image. Therefore, since the the Republican supporter userbox is using an image that is a copyright violation, instead of having inserted its filename, should not one have inserted the the non-free image removed logo and notified each person on whose UserPage the image appears of their violation? Isn’t that a task you should undertake, just to be consistent? — SpikeToronto (talk) 05:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

• The image is marked as free license. Until such time as the community reaches consensus that it is in fact not a free license image, it is a free license image. Therefore, it complies with policy. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I understand your words, but it is your action I find more telling. The Republican supporter userbox was using a non-free fair use image, so, in November you chose to fix that userbox by inserting code for a supposedly free-licence image. Similarly, a Democrat supporter userbox was using a non-free fair use image, however you chose to stifle that userbox by inserting code for the non-free image removed logo. Why were you not consistent in action? Why did you not instead choose to fix the Democrat supporter userbox by inserting code for an available free-licence image, exactly has you had done for the Republican supporter userbox? — SpikeToronto (talk) 20:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

• Good grief. Drop it already. Stop your accusations of bias against me. Just stop using fair use imagery outside of the main article namespace and stop accusing people of political bias. Enough is enough. --Hammersoft (talk) 21:00, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry, but they are not “accusations,” and I regret that you feel accused. They are apprehensions and inferences drawn from action. You acted against one political party’s supporter userbox and for another political party’s supporter userbox. Your actions were completely inconsistent. It remains troubling. If you cannot accept even the slightest possiblity that there is an apprehension (i.e., appearance) of bias on your part — whether or not there is actual bias — and cannot avert to using more care in future, one seriously has to consider dispute resolution over the matter, if only to firm up Misplaced Pages’s policy vis-à-vis politics. (Perhaps each and every userbox on the politics userbox page needs to be deleted?) I realize that with your greater wikiexperience you will most likely prevail, but the utter lack of acknowledgement that, even if you meant no bias, there is the appearance of bias on your part, remains troubling. That having been said, I will drop the matter here on your TalkPage. — SpikeToronto (talk) 21:47, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

image deleton

u deleted an image on my userpage dont do thatFW07 (talk) 18:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

• Sorry, but you were in violation of WP:NFCC item #9. The violation was removed. You do not own your userpage. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:50, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

i know but it is part of[REDACTED] and it is a[REDACTED] image so there — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fifaworld07 (talk • contribs)

• So? It's a fair use image. You can't have it on your userpage. It was removed. You know about the policy now, so I'm confident you won't violate it again. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)