Image talk:Ianking.jpg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of a fair use image as a replaceable image. Please do not modify it.

The result of the debate was to Delete the image.

[edit] Explanation of replaceability

The image is used to show what the person looks like; its use has no connection to the specific event. It is therefore replaceable by a free image of the same person. —xyzzy_n 10:57, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Concur. The event isn't discussed in the article, even then there is nothing in the image that couldn't be conveyed in words. That leaves us with just a photo of a living person, which isn't fair use on it's own. Not fair use. Megapixie 12:06, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Not fair use. No copyright information. No notability. Remove. Aditya Kabir 15:19, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Not Replaceable

The image has the connection of specific event from an seminar.And same kind of seminar can't be held in the same way in same manner.--NAHID 12:05, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Even if this image was really about the event, why do we need an image of the guy and a blackboard in an event? Unfree images must be used only when they add a great amount of information that can't be conveyed with text, which doesn't seems to be the case here. --Abu badali ^(talk) 16:05, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

He was in seminar and that type of seminar won't be possible to held again. The image of event, that is not just about the guy and the blackboard. Event can be decorated in several ways, Not by representing the guy and blackboard--NAHID 07:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

My point was: Do we need to decorate the section mentioning the event? --Abu badali ^(talk) 13:50, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Apologize, Can this image be replaced by a different one, while still having the same effect? The answer is No.frm--NAHID 22:41, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Please, understand that we have to fulfill 10 criterion for any use of an unfree image, and not only one. Anyway, if you trying to say the the "effect" this image has on the article is that it illustrates a "specific event from an seminar", I have to say I'm still not convinced. It's illustrating how the person looks like. --Abu badali ^(talk) 02:18, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

But yet, keep in mind that not every "specific event" deserves being illustrated, let alone by an unfree image. --Abu badali ^(talk) 02:18, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, aren't these just your Point. If we can't use event image then do we need to keep the {{subst:Promophoto}} license? Thanks--NAHID 12:02, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

How is an unspecified seminar is so important that it deserves the status of an event as in an historically significant event? Was this is first seminar, his last, his most important seminar or in any way a seminar that stands as a milestone to his career? Or is this just one of the seminars he did, and still does? If the latter is true, the image can't be fair use. If the earlier is true, than it needs substantiation. I'm afraid this image has to go for a delete in the end. Aditya Kabir 15:46, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

• Well, Is it possible to held this seminar again? See above section --NAHID 12:02, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Which seminar? Any seminar by Ian King? That would be easy to hold again. Aditya Kabir 15:15, 14 March 2007 (UTC)