Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion/2013 July 22: Difference between revisions

< Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 09:03, 23 July 2013 edit76.65.128.222 (talk) →File:Steiner postage stamp.gif ← Previous edit		Revision as of 11:10, 23 July 2013 edit undoPeacemaker67 (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators95,473 edits →File:Chetniks trampling the Nazi German flag.jpeg: respNext edit →
Line 75:		Line 75:
	::::::I see you have now provided some of the information requested, although it remains vague and imprecise in respect of this particular image. I should not have had to repeatedly ask for further information. You are the one that uploaded the file, and you should have provided all of the information about the photograph from the beginning, in fact from when you uploaded it. Feel free to apologise to everyone involved here for not doing your job as uploader in the first place. ] (]) 07:55, 23 July 2013 (UTC)		::::::I see you have now provided some of the information requested, although it remains vague and imprecise in respect of this particular image. I should not have had to repeatedly ask for further information. You are the one that uploaded the file, and you should have provided all of the information about the photograph from the beginning, in fact from when you uploaded it. Feel free to apologise to everyone involved here for not doing your job as uploader in the first place. ] (]) 07:55, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
	:::::::I have provided those information before you wrote your comment accusing me for presenting Serbian Cyrillic list of the sources and non-verifiability of the year of the photo. Let me remind you that you said you will help me with providing fair use rationale for this photo () after I explained that I have never uploaded non-free file and have no experience with FUR and asked you for help (). --] (]) 08:12, 23 July 2013 (UTC)		:::::::I have provided those information before you wrote your comment accusing me for presenting Serbian Cyrillic list of the sources and non-verifiability of the year of the photo. Let me remind you that you said you will help me with providing fair use rationale for this photo () after I explained that I have never uploaded non-free file and have no experience with FUR and asked you for help (). --] (]) 08:12, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
			::::::::I did, but given you are well aware from our previous interactions that I have clearly stated I do not understand any Yugoslav language, why would you provide any response to any request I make using Cyrillic (of all things)? I previously pointed you to the non-free rationales, and to an example I have used previously, but surely you cannot reasonably expect me to help you justify an image the source for which I cannot read (assuming it was available where I live or online), especially when you are making claims for it that are completely unsupportable. I stated what it shows to the uneducated eye (and attempted to edit the image description to that effect), and now you have stated what a purported ] states it shows. No more, no less. I say to the untutored eye it shows some males standing on a Nazi flag. You say (without any evidence whatsoever) it shows something about the attitude of "some" Chetniks. It doesn't. You have now stated what the source (assuming he and his book are reliable) says it shows. That is what the image description should say, not something you dreamed up. You need to add all the material you have produced about the source of this photograph and what it shows to the image description. Now. ] (]) 11:10, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

	====]====		====]====

Revision as of 11:10, 23 July 2013

< July 21	July 23 >

July 22

File:Orwell Signature.png

Obsoleted by Vector. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:49, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Xlrecordingslogo.jpg

Obsoleted by vector, seemingly unused. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 01:07, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Cache,basic.png

Obsoleted by vector, seemingly unused. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 01:11, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Cache,associative-read.png

Obsoleted by vector, seemingly unused. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 01:19, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Gold Mining at K.G.F., India.jpg

Delete: this 1980 Indian postage stamp is copyright for 60 years per commons:Commons:Stamps/Public domain#India and fails WP:NFCC#8 as there is no critical commentary about the stamps itself. The fact that the stamp was issued to commemorate this topic can easily be explained by prose alone without the need for a non-free image. It also fails WP:NFCI #3. ww2censor (talk) 09:09, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

File:2005 USPostal ChaChaCha Stamp.jpg

Delete: This 2005 USPS issued stamp is still in copyright and clearly fails WP:NFCC#8 because there is no critical commentary about the stamp itself. The fact that it was issued is already well explained in the prose and is not necessary for the reader to understand it. If there were sourced critical commentary about the stamp to justify it inclusion, it might pass NFCC. ww2censor (talk) 09:22, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

This is the only example of an artist's art used in the article. It's generally accepted that this is acceptable fair use. (It just so happens that it's depicted on a stamp.) --B (talk) 23:58, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
Keep the artist is still alive, therefore any artwork is still protected. This is used to illustrate the style of the artist, and therefore is important to the understanding of the topic. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 03:32, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Boy and Girl Scouting begins Celebrate the Century stamp.jpg

Delete: Non-free image removed from Scouting in popular culture and replaced with a free image File:Australianstamp 1590.jpg from the commons as this one failed WP:NFCC#1 (it was replaceable) and WP:NFCC#8 (there was no critical commentary that would justify its inclusion). There are several free images available even though not many have been uploaded. ww2censor (talk) 09:31, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

File:NYC Public Library Lion Stamp (US Postage).png

Delete: This 2000 USPS issued stamp is still in copyright and clearly fails WP:NFCC#8 because there is no critical commentary about the stamp itself and is used just as a decorative illustration. The fact that it was issued could easily be explained in the prose and the non-free stamp image not necessary for the reader to understand that fact. If there were sourced critical commentary about the stamp to justify it inclusion, it might pass NFCC. ww2censor (talk) 09:41, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

While the uploader has rewritten the fair-use rationale there is still no critical commentary about the stamp of any kind and no sources of any kind to show that this was indicative of the artist's work. Everything I wrote above still applies. The purpose now being an example of the kind of work the artist does is just not enough to justify its use. You have to do much better or find a freely licenced piece of her work to replace this one. ww2censor (talk) 17:26, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

As with one above, this is the only example of an artist's work in an article about the artist. That's generally considered to be acceptable, as it obviously increases a reader's understanding of an artist to see something that artist created. --B (talk) 00:04, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Keep this is used to illustrate the style of the artist, therefore is of importance in understanding the topic (the artist), and the artist is still alive, so all works by the artist are protected. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 03:35, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Steiner postage stamp.gif

Delete: This 1999 USPS issued stamp is still in copyright and clearly fails WP:NFCC#8 because there is no critical commentary about the stamp itself. The fact that it was issued is already well explained in the prose and the use of a non-free image is not necessary for the reader to understand that. It also fails WP:NFC#UUI #3 because it is used to illustrate the subject of the stamp and is not used in a stamp article about that stamp. ww2censor (talk) 09:46, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Revise and keep: Suggest changing the non-free license to "a historically significant fair use image," being that there are no free images of him yet. The copyright of a postage stamp is no different than any other copyrighted artwork.--Light show (talk) 04:45, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Comment subject is dead, so no new free photo can be created of this person -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 09:03, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

File:US Postage Stamp Monitor & Virginia.jpg

Delete: This 1995 USPS issued stamp is still in copyright and clearly fails WP:NFCC#8 because there is no critical commentary about the stamp itself. The fact that it was issued could be well explained in the prose and is not necessary for the reader to understand that fact. It is just used a decoration and also fails WP:NFC#UUI #3 as it is used to illustrate the subject of the image. If there were sourced critical commentary about the stamp itself to justify its inclusion, it might pass NFCC though I feel that is unlikely. ww2censor (talk) 09:56, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Keep The image of the stamp on the USS Monitor page is included simply to show that the US Postal Service issued the stamp in commemoration of the two ships depicted thereon. No one's interests, including the USPS, has been compromised and the fair use rationale for the image has been completed. The claim "It is just used a decoration" is a personal opinion. The reason the stamp was issued and why its image exists on the page is self explanatory, given the section title, and is explained in the caption. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 17:49, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
- You may wish to read Misplaced Pages's fair use policy, which requires that images used under a claim of fair use substantially increase a reader's understanding of a topic. Though there is no question that we could LEGALLY use the image under US law, we intentionally restrict ourselves from using fair use images in most cases. --B (talk) 00:02, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

The topic is Memorials, per the section title, and the stamp was issued, nationwide, in memory of the ship. The ship has been honored and celebrated by numerous organizations. Not including the U.S. Postage stamp issued in its memory and honor would be leaving a rather big void in this topic. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 08:32, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Chetniks trampling the Nazi German flag.jpeg

I'm sure this was uploaded in good faith. However, it's a presumably non-free photo with no author or source information available, and it's used in an article in a decorative way. Violation of WP:NFCC#8 and #10. – Quadell 14:51, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Comment: I uploaded this image. This book is the source. The image is used to illustrate position of some Chetniks toward Wermacht, not for decoration.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 15:00, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
- That book is the immediate source, but the author of the book does not hold the copyright to the photograph, and I don't think we know who does. By "decorative", what I mean is, you could easily say in text "Many Chetniks opposed and fought against Nazi Germany", and that information would be presented without violating anyone's copyright. What information is portrayed by the photo that cannot be conveyed with text? – Quadell 18:08, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't completely agree because I think that images like this are much more informative than text.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:43, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Keep - Some editors made such a major effort in bringing pictures about the aspect of Chetnik collaboration with Nazis, that there is a major need here on en.wiki to find pictures that show their resistance position (after all, they were a resistance moviment). Calling this "decorative" is out of context and wrong. FkpCascais (talk) 15:45, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
- I believe that many Chetniks resisted the Nazis. We should clearly convey a NPOV description of the situation in text. But that is not a valid reason to use a non-free image in Misplaced Pages. – Quadell 18:08, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Delete I fail to see how this non-free photograph of five males standing on a Nazi flag "significantly increases readers' understanding of the topic" or how "its omission would be detrimental to that understanding" per NFCC#8. No author or copyright information has been provided on the description page, nor have any verifiable information on the location in which it was taken, the date (or year) it was taken, or a year it was originally published (all per NFCC#10). The resistance activities of Chetniks are already presented in the article using reliable sources, as is the collaboration of Chetniks with the Axis occupation forces and their local allies. There is little if any evidentiary value of "resistance" provided by a photograph of five males standing on a flag without any context in terms of place, date or participants. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 04:39, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

No. You misinterpreted the context of this flag. This photo is not what you say ("five males standing on a Nazi flag") I explained at article's talk page who are males standing on flag (Kondor and his associates) and when it was taken (September 1943) and sources of the photo. Chetnik commander of Zlatibor corp and commanders of 1st and 2nd brigade of Rača trampling German flag they captured in Bajina Bašta in September 1943. Taking in consideration the sourced context this photo indeed can "significantly increases readers' understanding of the topic".--Antidiskriminator (talk) 06:35, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

I beg to differ. You have provided new information here that you did not provide on the talk page. And I also explained what "trample" means in English, and they clearly are not "trampling" anything. They are standing on it. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 07:38, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

I already provided translation (on the file's talkpage) of the text from the source (book which has this photo on itc covers which clearly says "газе немачку заставу") which supports trampling verb. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 08:02, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Delete per Peacemaker67. The image is not really necessary to understand the topic of the section or the article it is used in. Even more, it is funny to use this image in the same section as "British intercepts (Ultra) of German message traffic confirmed Chetnik timidity". It is possible that the image is free, however as long as the year of creation and the year of the original publication are not known, it must be presumed non-free. --Eleassar 06:41, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

I explained the year of the creation of this photo (1943) together with details of book which published it on its covers at talkpage of this file.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 06:49, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

This book is fairly recent, however per (Article 141), the publisher of a public domain work has the same material rights as the creator of the work, which last for 70 years. Can you prove that the image is free? Otherwise, in my opinion, it is redundant and doesn't meet the criteria for the non-free content. --Eleassar 07:02, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

No, I can not prove the image is free but I provided arguments why it meets criteria for non-free image use.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 07:18, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

What effort has been made to find free alternatives? --Eleassar 07:37, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Ad's initial explanation consisted of unsupported assertions that he had "read somewhere" about the year of the photo and someone in it, all of which is unverifiable. He also used Serbian Cyrillic to list the sources used in the book. What is anyone expected to make of that? Peacemaker67 (send... over) 07:07, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Incorrect. At your request I explained at file's talkpage exactly where I got information about this photo and I also explained on English what is the list of sources. All of those assertions can be verified online because I provided links together with translations. Don't be afraid to apologize, and remember to apologize with sincerity. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 07:18, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

I see you have now provided some of the information requested, although it remains vague and imprecise in respect of this particular image. I should not have had to repeatedly ask for further information. You are the one that uploaded the file, and you should have provided all of the information about the photograph from the beginning, in fact from when you uploaded it. Feel free to apologise to everyone involved here for not doing your job as uploader in the first place. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 07:55, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

I have provided those information before you wrote your comment accusing me for presenting Serbian Cyrillic list of the sources and non-verifiability of the year of the photo. Let me remind you that you said you will help me with providing fair use rationale for this photo (diff) after I explained that I have never uploaded non-free file and have no experience with FUR and asked you for help (diff). --Antidiskriminator (talk) 08:12, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

I did, but given you are well aware from our previous interactions that I have clearly stated I do not understand any Yugoslav language, why would you provide any response to any request I make using Cyrillic (of all things)? I previously pointed you to the non-free rationales, and to an example I have used previously, but surely you cannot reasonably expect me to help you justify an image the source for which I cannot read (assuming it was available where I live or online), especially when you are making claims for it that are completely unsupportable. I stated what it shows to the uneducated eye (and attempted to edit the image description to that effect), and now you have stated what a purported WP:RS states it shows. No more, no less. I say to the untutored eye it shows some males standing on a Nazi flag. You say (without any evidence whatsoever) it shows something about the attitude of "some" Chetniks. It doesn't. You have now stated what the source (assuming he and his book are reliable) says it shows. That is what the image description should say, not something you dreamed up. You need to add all the material you have produced about the source of this photograph and what it shows to the image description. Now. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 11:10, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Dead Man Walking (Body of Proof).jpg

I love Body of Proof and hate it that it's being canceled. But I don't see how seeing this screenshot could possibly improve a user's understanding of a particular episode. It's an infobox photo for the sake of having an infobox photo. B (talk) 23:55, 22 July 2013 (UTC)