Talk:Katherine Moennig

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

[edit] "Replaceability"

The L Word publicity shot of Moennig as "Shayne" is currently tagged as "replaceable," which means that someone thinks we can get a free alternative that depicts substantially the same information. A lot of people ignore the information that comes with context and mistakenly think all pictures of people are equally interchangeable. Though I think a screenshot of her from an episode would be even more informative (anyone?), this definitely provides different information than a candid street shot would. Please leave your comments at Image talk:Katherine Moennig.jpg. Postdlf 15:22, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I think we need to revisit what #1 of WP:FUC says:

1. No free equivalent is available or could be created that would adequately give the same information. If unfree material can be transformed into free material, it should be done instead of using a "fair use" defense. For example, the information in a newspaper article can easily be used as a basis of an original article and then cited as a reference. Maps and diagrams can often be redrawn from original sources, though simply "tracing" copyrighted material does not make it free. Neither photographs nor sound clips, however, can usually be "transformed" in this way. However, if the subject of the photograph still exists, a freely-licensed photograph could be taken.

That's pretty clear to me. This is a public person who is, obviously, still alive. Although it may be dificult to find or take a fair use image, it's completely possible. Because of this, it fails first fair use criterion.

I'm a fan of the subject of this article (as I am assuming some of the editors here are), but policy is policy and if we ever want this article (or any other article for that matter) to be on the level of a good article or featured article, then things like this need to get cleaned up. This is why I've also made recent reference, footnote, and external link fixes throughout the article. It is my intention for any article I edit to meet good article standards. Removing/replacing failed fair use images is a part of that. Roguegeek (talk) 16:59, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Note to others: please see continued discussion at the image's talk page, where I point out that FUC #1 requires that the replacement must "adequately give the same information," and reiterate that all images of a person are not equally interchangeable. Postdlf 19:26, 27 November 2006 (UTC)