Misplaced Pages

Image:128292588561683750puturmoneein.jpg

Image:128292588561683750puturmoneein.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Aliheartheart (notify | contribs).

• Unencyclopedic, being used for the sole purpose of creating nonsense pages Nick—/_Contribs 08:12, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Head-cat.jpg

Image:Head-cat.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Aliheartheart (notify | contribs).

• Unencyclopedic, being used for the sole purpose of creating nonsense pages Nick—/_Contribs 08:13, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Stanley_baldwin.jpg

Image:Stanley_baldwin.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Mackensen (notify | contribs).

• nndb is not a valid source for images (they're just a website using images). Besides, after being properly sourced, this non-free image should be removed from some of the 18 articles it's currently used in Abu badali 11:31, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment Crown copyright in Mother England is 50 years after publication - given that the guy took a dirt nap in '47, it seems fairly likely the image is actually PD. I'll investigate. WilyD 14:14, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

• http://www.gac.culture.gov.uk/search/Object.asp?object_key=10678 The photo was taken previous to 1929, as it was purchased by the UK government in 1929. This suggests to me it's not actually covered by Crown Copyright there (if you go through the long gibbering about it, works really need to be produced for the Queen, not just bought be her later, to qualify as crown copyright. I'll therefor suggest this is covered by ordinary UK copyright. http://commons.wikimedia.org/Template:PD-UK-unknown - Commons suggests we can reasonably infer the image is PD, given that the image was bought by the government art collection in 1929, for display, and was (presumably) displayed. While one might be able to wedge a sliver of doubt in there, it seems very likely it's PD - let's hold off on any purge of appearences for the moment. WilyD 14:30, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Time-magazine-neville-chamberlain.jpg

Image:Time-magazine-neville-chamberlain.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Jengod (notify | contribs).

• Non-free image of a magazine's cover, used in an article that do not mention the cover (nor event the magazine) Abu badali 11:32, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Evel_Knievel_-_Pinball_Machine.jpg

Image:Evel_Knievel_-_Pinball_Machine.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Jerkmonkee (notify | contribs).

• A full-page ad, used in an article that doesn't mention the ad – Quadell 13:22, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:EvelynBrent1.jpg

Image:EvelynBrent1.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by DCGeist (notify | contribs).

• Non-free photo of a person who is barely mentioned in the article – Quadell 13:25, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

• Keep The claim above is patently in error. There are multiple significant mentions of the subject in the article, Film Booking Offices of America:

"B. P. Fineman became the studio's production chief in 1924; Evelyn Brent, his wife, moved over from Fox to become FBO's top dramatic star."

"Fineman and Brent both departed FBO around the time of the purchase."

"Evelyn Brent was FBO's most prized non-Western star."

"Tod Browning directed two Gothic Pictures specials in 1924 starring Evelyn Brent: The Dangerous Flirt and Silk Stocking Sal."

"A masked Brent in the title role of Lady Robin Hood (1925), directed by Ralph Ince. Her cowering foe is played by Boris Karloff..."

(and, in the caption of the photo in question:) "Publicity photo of Evelyn Brent, star of 14 FBO films between 1924 and 1926."

Note also that the article passed FAC with this photo and the relevant text in place (I would supply a diff, but in fact the article has not been edited in the slightest since its promotion to Featured Article status in June).—DCGeist 16:09, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:ESP_Xtone_Ad.gif

Image:ESP_Xtone_Ad.gif (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by QelDroma06 (notify | contribs).

• Ad, used only decoratively – Quadell 13:35, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Kirk_Hammett_ESP.gif

Image:Kirk_Hammett_ESP.gif (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by QelDroma06 (notify | contribs).

• Ad, used only decoratively – Quadell 13:35, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:ESP_Anniversary_Promo.jpg

Image:ESP_Anniversary_Promo.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by QelDroma06 (notify | contribs).

• Ad, used only decoratively – Quadell 13:36, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Darwin_on_Trial.jpg

Image:Darwin_on_Trial.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Duncharris (notify | contribs).

• I am actually proposing that this image be removed from its usages on Philip E. Johnson and Intelligent design, although usage on the article about the book should be OK. The image should be removed from those articles per WP:NFCC#8 in that omission of the image from those articles would cause negligible detriment to the reader's understanding of the topic. I know this isn't the ideal forum for this, but the 'fair use disputed' tags keep getting deleted and there is no better forum to which to take this. Videmus Omnia 13:56, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

• Keep. 1) ID is not aimed at the scientific community, but squarely at high school science students and thus school boards. As a cover of one of the primary ID books high school students and board members are likely to find in their library or waved furiously around at board meetings, it is indeed illustrative of the topic that they represent and thus are quite properly used at the articles at which they appear as the primary means of visual identification of the topic. 2) Videmus Omnia appears to have listed this image in a fit of pique. First he called for everyone commenting on a informal deletion discussion yesterday to "let an uninvolved admin decide" whether to keep the images. As an admin familiar with ID who had not been involved in placing the images I was asked to take a look and decide. And when I decided to keep them Videmus Omnia reverted once then immediately rushed to WP:IFD it once he realized an admin decided to keep. Clearly WP:NFCC#8 is being zealously over-applied here. FeloniousMonk 14:20, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Please commment on contributions, not contributors. I'd ask that you please become familiar with WP:NFCC before making admin decisions on image issues, as the image has a pretty clearly invalid rationale - for example, it's in clear violation of WP:NFCC#10c in that it does not specify the article in which it is to be used. Videmus Omnia 14:29, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
    • No offense, but 10c is a {{sofixit}} issue. It is not a deletion issue, ever. WilyD 14:35, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
      • I'm sorry, but I can't fix that, because I don't see a valid reason for including this image in any other article but that about the book (at least not with the reasoning given). And images that don't comply with the policy have to be deleted per Item 4 of the Foundation's resolution. Videmus Omnia 16:07, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
        • You can fix any NFCC10c problems. It's easier than pissing in the shower, and twice as fun. Whether you can fix NFCC8 problems is an unrelated question. WilyD 16:15, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
    • Videmius, you should become familiar with WP:BURO and WP:CON.SuperElephant 15:00, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
      • I'm familiar with them, I invite your attention to WP:NFCC. Videmus Omnia 16:07, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
        • You link to it in every post. Do you really think I'm not aware of it's existence? WP:BURO and WP:CON are more important than WP:NFCC.SuperElephant 17:23, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per FM. Raul654 14:31, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep — No deletion rationale presented <<<personal attack removed>>>. Matthew 14:55, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Keep per FM. And yes, I'm going to comment on the nominator--thanks for waste our time with your vendetta. OrangeMarlin 16:10, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep - No rationale given. Once again, VO is using NFCC#8 as if it were self-evident. It isn't. Please explain why you think that the image makes no significant improvement to the understanding of the article. Guettarda 17:01, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
  • So far as I can see, the impact on the reader's understanding of the topics above would be negligible if the image was omitted. How is this incorrect? Videmus Omnia 17:07, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
• Use only on article about the book - There's no need to multiply the use of non-free material as this. The other articles don't ask for the image. --Abu badali 17:37, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment: Insulting VO, or maligning his motives, is childish and not useful. His concerns are legitimate. – Quadell 17:54, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
• Remove from Phillip E. Johnson and Intelligent design. If this particular book were the subject of the articles, it would of course pass NFCC #8. But seeing the cover of the book does not help anyone understand the concept of ID or Johnson's ideas. It would be a useful decoration, but it does not provide any encyclopedic information about ID that words alone can't convey. In many, many previous deletion debates, it was repeatedly held that a book cover can't be used in an article unless the article or a major section of the article is specifically about the book itself. I can't see any reason to treat this case any differently. – Quadell 17:54, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Just on copyright principles alone. I fail to see the issue here about fair use. Using the bookcover is going to fall under editorial use. I think that there is even a template for the use of this kind of image. I really question the motives of putting this up for deletion in the first place.-Nodekeeper 19:47, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Keep It depicts books central to the topics that readers are likely to run into. VO has been hammering away at this and other related images to get them deleted long enough, it's becoming disruptive. Odd nature 20:02, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Nady el zamalek logo.jpg

Image:Nady el zamalek logo.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by Ebsawy (notify | contribs).

• Image links nowhere -JacќяМ ¿Qué? 16:56, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Chitra Ramanathan's series paintings.jpg

Image:Chitra Ramanathan's series paintings.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs) - uploaded by TheDay (notify | contribs).

• OU a refuge of vanity (see Chitra Ramanathan). ccwaters 18:41, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

{{subst:ifd2|1=Darwinsblackbox.jpg|Uploader=Deltaforce5000|Reason=Remove from usage on Intelligent design and Irreducible complexity, retain for use on the book's article. In the first 2 articles, the image does not satisfy the criterion of

As per the Wikimedia Foundation Licensing policy resolution of March 23, 2007, this document serves as the Exemption Doctrine Policy for the English Misplaced Pages.

Rationale

• To support Misplaced Pages's mission to produce perpetually free content for unlimited distribution, modification and application by all users in all media
• To minimize legal exposure by limiting the amount of non-free content, using more narrowly defined criteria than apply under the fair use provisions in United States copyright law
• To facilitate the judicious use of non-free content to support the development of a high-quality encyclopedia

Policy

• WP:NFCCP

There is no automatic entitlement to use non-free content in an article or elsewhere on Misplaced Pages. Articles and other Misplaced Pages pages may, in accordance with the guideline, use brief verbatim textual excerpts from copyrighted media, properly attributed or cited to its original source or author (as described by the citation guideline), and specifically indicated as direct quotations via quotation marks, <blockquote>, {{Quote}}, or a similar method. Other non-free content—including all copyrighted images, audio and video clips, and other media files that lack a free content license—may be used on the English Misplaced Pages only where all 10 of the following criteria are met.

1. Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion/2007 August 21/spanNo free equivalent. Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose.
2. Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion/2007 August 21/spanRespect for commercial opportunities. Non-free content is not used in a manner that is likely to replace the original market role of the original copyrighted material.
3. Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion/2007 August 21/spanMinimal usage:
   1. Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion/2007 August 21/spanMinimal number of items. Multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information.
   2. Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion/2007 August 21/spanMinimal extent of use. An entire work is not used if a portion will suffice. Low-resolution, rather than high-resolution/fidelity/bit rate is used (especially where the original could be used for deliberate copyright infringement). This rule also applies to the copy in the File: namespace.
4. Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion/2007 August 21/spanPrevious publication. Non-free content must be a work which has been published or publicly displayed outside Misplaced Pages by (or with permission from) the copyright holder, or a derivative of such a work created by a Misplaced Pages editor.
5. Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion/2007 August 21/spanContent. Non-free content meets general Misplaced Pages content standards and is encyclopedic.
6. Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion/2007 August 21/spanMedia-specific policy. Non-free content meets Misplaced Pages's media-specific policy. For example, images must meet Misplaced Pages:Image use policy.
7. Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion/2007 August 21/spanOne-article minimum. Non-free content is used in at least one article.
8. Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion/2007 August 21/spanContextual significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.
9. Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion/2007 August 21/spanRestrictions on location. Non-free content is allowed only in articles (not disambiguation pages), and only in the article namespace, subject to exemptions. (To prevent an image category from displaying thumbnails, add __NOGALLERY__ to it; images are linked, not inlined, from talk pages when they are a topic of discussion.)
10. Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion/2007 August 21/spanImage description page. The image or media description page contains the following:
    1. Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion/2007 August 21/spanIdentification of the source of the original copyrighted material, supplemented, where possible, with information about the artist, publisher and copyright holder, and year of copyright; this is to help determine the material's potential market value. See: Misplaced Pages:Citing sources § Multimedia.
    2. Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion/2007 August 21/spanA copyright tag that indicates which Misplaced Pages policy provision is claimed to permit the use. For a list of image copyright tags, see Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags/Non-free content.
    3. Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion/2007 August 21/spanThe name of each article (a link to each article is also recommended) in which fair use is claimed for the item, and a separate, specific non-free use rationale for each use of the item, as explained at Misplaced Pages:Non-free use rationale guideline. The rationale is presented in clear, plain language and is relevant to each use.

Enforcement

• WP:NFCCE

• A file with a valid non-free-use rationale for some (but not all) articles it is used in will not be deleted. Instead, the file should be removed from the articles for which it lacks a non-free-use rationale, or a suitable rationale added.
• A file on which non-free use is claimed that is not used in any article (NFCC 7) may be deleted after being tagged for seven days under speedy deletion criterion F5.
• A non-free file lacking a non-free use rationale may be deleted after being tagged for seven days under speedy deletion criterion F6.
• A file in use in an article that does not meet F5 or F6 may be deleted under speedy deletion criterion F7 as follows:
  • Media from a commercial source which are not the subject of sourced commentary may be deleted immediately under F7b.
  • Non-free media which fail NFCC 1 (no free equivalent) may be deleted after being tagged as such for two days under F7c.
  • Other media with invalid fair-use claims may be deleted after being tagged as such for seven days under F7d.

Note that it is the duty of users seeking to include or retain content to provide a valid rationale; those seeking to remove or delete it are not required to show that one cannot be created—see burden of proof.

Files for discussion is the central venue to discuss whether a particular image meets the non-free content criteria, regardless of whether the file should be deleted or not. For example, a discussion might be held about whether it is appropriate to use an image in ARTICLE1 even if it unquestionably meets the criteria for use in ARTICLE2.

Footnotes

1. At the time of the Resolution's issuance on March 23, 2007, the page WP:Non-free content served as the exemption doctrine policy and is referenced by the Resolution. Since then, the content has been moved around, specifically discussed the following May, and now WP:Non-free content criteria serves as the exemption doctrine policy, while WP:Non-free content serves as guidance for this.
2. A redirect pointing to the page where the non-free content is intended to be used is acceptable as the article name in the non-free use rationale.