Image talk:PietKroonenberg.jpg

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

ImagePietKroonenberg.jpg is part of the Scouting WikiProject, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Scouting and Guiding on the Wikipedia. This includes but is not limited to boy and girl organizations, WAGGGS and WOSM organizations as well as those not so affiliated, country and region-specific topics, and anything else related to Scouting. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

NA

This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the quality scale.

[edit] Fair use

This picture was taken as part of a special event that will not happen again. Therefore, no new picture can be made of this. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 23:02, 16 October 2006 (UTC).

The user who is placing all these deletion tags is specifically going after photos I uploaded, after I pointed out his rude behavior and comments. Chris 23:07, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

This image is not being used to illustrate a special even. It's being used to illustrate a person. --Abu Badali 16:14, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

• Indeed. And that person is (among other) notable because of the event. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 16:39, 17 October 2006 (UTC).

The event is not being illustrated. The person is. Non-free photographs of living people are generally not allowed on Wikipedia. Sorry. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 17:37, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

• The article for which this picture is declared fair use is about the person. Non-free photographs are fully acceptable when they comply with the fair use criteria. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 19:01, 17 October 2006 (UTC).

To better show why this picture is correctly declared as fair use, I have copy-edited the text of both the summary and the fair use rationale. I hope that this clarifies any doubts. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 20:07, 17 October 2006 (UTC).

The image is being used to illustrate the person, and not the award wining event. It's not unrepeatable. --Abu Badali 20:57, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

"Non-free photographs are fully acceptable when they comply with the fair use criteria." Yes. And in order to comply with our fair use criteria (specifically criterion #1), they have to be non-repeatable. It would have to impossible to take a photo of this person and release it under a free license. That is obviously not the case. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 15:16, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

• I have to repeat: you cannot recreate a picture of Kroonenberg in 1996 wearing his Bronze Beaver award at the celebration in Russia. And Kroonenberg is (among others) notable because of his receiving the award. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 21:44, 18 October 2006 (UTC).
  • So why would a free recent photo of Kroonenberg wearing his Bronze Beaver, standing in a different corner, not illustrate the Piet J. Kroonenberg just as well? – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 12:17, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
    • A recent photo is not available, as Mr Kroonenberg does not appear much in public. And it would not illustratie mr Kroonenberg at (one of) his glory periods for which he is notable. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 21:52, 19 October 2006 (UTC).
  • The image is being used to illustrate the person, and not the award wining event. It's not unrepeatable. --Abu Badali 16:10, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
    • You're repetitive without adding either arguments or useful info. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 21:52, 19 October 2006 (UTC).
      • 1. By simply depicting Mr. Kroonenberg using his medal, the picture doesn't captures an award wining event. A picture of him wearing the medal is repeatable.
        2. The image is used at the top of the article, not at the section mentioning the award wining event. A picture of him not wearing the medal, would serve the same purpose. --Abu Badali 22:46, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

As neither the uploader of the image nor the one to include the image in the article under the Fair Use tag, I conclude that there is neither a overwhelming for or against position: each comment can be explained and answered, but simply gets restated. Therefore I have changed the image tag from the deletionist 'fairusedisputed' to 'fairusereview', inviting others to give their POV. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 22:09, 19 October 2006 (UTC).

There's no reason to remove the {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} tag. They can coexist. --Abu Badali 22:46, 19 October 2006 (UTC)