Keep; The rational for deletion is faulty. “It is possible to simply photograph a [fill in the blank] and obtain a free picture.” This is true in every case in which fair use is claimed. The rational itself if taken at face values invalidates ANY fair use claim for ANY photo ANYWHERE within WP. The point seems to be that Fair use itself is no longer a valid claim. BTW, if I had a treadle pump at my disposal I would take a photo. I don’t, thus the claim of “Fair Use”. Brimba (talk) 01:41, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. This is not true in every case in which fair use can be claimed. See Wikipedia:FAIRUSE for a list of special cases in which fair use applies. This is not one of them. Simple lack of availability of the object in question for you to photograph is not a valid fair use rationale. I cannot, for instance, claim fair use on a commercial shot of Mount Everest simply because I am unable to get there. If you want to release a free image, then you can go and buy a treadle pump and photograph it yourself. A free replacement can clearly be found if you are willing to do it. siℓℓy rabbit (talk) 21:58, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
In my opinion, the video demonstrates a sample of the actual song in question. Links to YouTube are not freely accessible or reliable, and as this is a sample it falls under Wikipedia's Fair Use Policy. The video extract in question demonstrates many features discussed in the Music Video section of the article (Crank_That_(Soulja_Boy)) such as the popularity of the dance on video-sharing websites/viral media as well as Mr. Collipark send a text message to Soulja Boy. The video also contains the music for the song, therefore also making it suitable to demonstrate the style and features of the song. Futhermore, it DOES increase reader's understanding, becuase if a picture speaks 1,000 words, then a video speaks many more. Pictures have been added to Wikipedia for years - if everyone took your point of view, we'd simply have links to these images instead of actually using them. The media presents no copyright or style violations, so I'm voting for it to be kept.
P.S. A link to YouTube would not have the same video quality or be in a free, open source format available to all Wikipedia readers. Adammw (talk) 14:06, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
I fail to see how the free use criterion that "no free equivalent is available or could be created that would adequately give the same information" applies here. I do not believe that this image is the only one adequately providing detail on melanoma, and it certainly must not be true that no free equivalent could be created. The image thus fails the free use policy. — scetoaux(T|C)20:22, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
X
Diese Website benutzt Cookies. Wenn du die Website weiter nutzt, gehe Ich von Deinem Einverständnis aus.OKNeinDatenschutzerklärung
