Image talk:Ruslana pub.jpg
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] disputed tag
The image is of a world renowned entetainer, the pop-singer and a model. For such articles having a representative image of the subject is extremely important to the reader's being able to consume the article's content, that is to get the best possible idea of the article's subject. No comparable free image is available to the best of the uploader's knowledge.
Getting a shot from a stray Wikipedian meeting her in the street is extremely unlikely. Besides, the amateur quality image taken as she cares for her everyday business cannot substitute the professional quality image specifically released to give the viewers the best representation of the subject, especially when talking about professional entetainers whose appearance is very important in their public perception. --Irpen 02:24, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Irpen above. This image contributes significantly to the Ruslana article by identifying the subject of the article. From WP:Fair use criteria, a test is suggested: Can this image be replaced by a different one, while still having the same effect? I do not think that another image is currently available which can replace this one. Should one come to my attention, I will be the first to exchange the fair use image for one that is more freely licensed.--Riurik (discuss) 05:15, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Our fair use policy forbids using a non-free image if a free image could be created that could be used in its place. See criterion #1 and counter-example #8. In this case, it would be possible to create a free image; therefore this non-free image may not be used. Whether a free replacement image exists or not at this time is not relevant. – Quadell (talk) (random) 16:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
First, the Policy was recently rewritten by a narrow group of deletionists with no input from other Wikipedians. Second, even the current policy if interpreted in good faith does not forbid the image. My point exactly is that it is impossible to create a free image that would reasonably replace the current one because we are talking about the entetainer whose looks played an important role in her career and affect her fan-base. If a professional quality publicity image is replaced by a amateur image taken in the street, the article would be deprived of too much of its usefulness as the replacement amateur image would not in any reasonable way illustrate what the article is all about.
Generally, the problem is two-fold. How reasonable amount of effort would it take to get a replacement image and how reasonable is to expect that the image taken within a reasonable effort would reasonably provide the same adequate information to the reader.
To the first question the answer is it depends. Taking an image of a notable building or church located in an area that we expect to be frequented by Wikipedia editors is withing reasonable effort. At the same time taking an image of the top of Everest or of the back side of the Moon is in principle possible (Pay $$$ to Roskosmos and they will take you to space). These are two extreme case where it is easy to judge whether a free picture could reasonably be created. There are lots of territory between them and each case should be judged my its own merit. How likely is for a Wikipedian with a Camera to meet a particular person in conditions where one can make a good enough photoshot (note the words good enough). Suppose the person is accessible, like the sibject is a regular college professor who walk in his university every day. Quite another case is when the subject lives quite an exclusive life (and not necessarily secluded one). Chances of meeting such person in conditions that may produce a reasonably acceptable photo are very unlikely.
Second question is how well such a picture, if taken, illustrate the article. I guess for a professor or a writer such amateur image as a replacement of a professional one, would not miss somethin critically important for the article's reader. In the end, how exactly such people look is of secondary importance. But what about the entetainers whose looks played an important role in making them notable. Does a PD mugshot of a celebrity caught drunk-driving provide an adequate information to the reader to understand the article? Of course it is not.
Of course getting the image subjects releasing their images for free would be the best solution. The proposal of organizing such campaign has been cleverly floated at Chowbok's RfC. Perhaps we will start getting more such approvals if this becomes an organized effort. However, for the cases where no such image is available, the fair use publicity images are irreplaceable. --Irpen 22:22, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- I concur with Irpen in this instance. (1) a picture of her in her stage persona adds value to the article, and (2) getting a free picture of her in her stage persona would likely be completely impossible. Pictures of her in this guise are presumably tightly controlled and there is no reason to believe that the copyright holder of any of them would release it into the public domain - why would he? The image should be retained. Herostratus 02:08, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
