Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Artwork of Isaac Mendez

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Keep, but remove images. —Quarl (talk) 2007-03-07 06:17Z

[edit] Artwork of Isaac Mendez

Artwork of Isaac Mendez (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This page is a gallery of copyrighted images, and the rest of the (little) content of the page is nothing other than info on a fictional character. Phuzion 04:09, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Speedy Delete before the lawyers come marching in. Ezratrumpet 04:26, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy Delete per WP:HOLYCOPYRIGHTVIOLATIONBATMAN. --Haemo 04:57, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep contains critical commentary of the artist's style (hence fair use) Nardman1 05:26, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
This isn't even remotely fair use. Read WP:FU for the acceptable uses of copyrighted images. In no way does adding comments critical of the images in question fall under the guidelines therein. This is not fair use. --Haemo 07:48, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Actually, it appears that all non-FU images have now been deleted. However, this article now has little to no content, and should be merged to Isaac Mendez. --Haemo 07:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete and Merge after. IntinnTalk! 09:29, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge with Isaac Mendez. In the context of discussing the character and the TV series, this is entirely appropriate (at least until such time that Wikipedia policy forbids such articles). Fair Use is better supported by presenting the screenshots (for that's what they are) in the context of the character article; and this is fair use because the images are being used for direct discussion of the images. The Mendez article is not so long, nor is it likely to become so long, that this section needs a separate article. 23skidoo 12:44, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete, either copyright violation or someone to stingy to get his own web-gallery. In either case there is no place on wiki AlfPhotoman 14:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment. I'm curious if the above editor is aware that Isaac Mendez is a fictional character and that his different paintings are critical to the plot of the television series Heroes? 23skidoo 17:41, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Does that imply that nobody has a copyright and that nobody is interested in displaying his work? AlfPhotoman 19:58, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
P.S with nobody I mean Tim Sale naturally AlfPhotoman 20:16, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete fancruft + copyright problems. Wile E. Heresiarch 16:00, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment The images are clearly a copyright issue. However, the descriptions might have a place on the Isaac Mendez page.Chunky Rice 18:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge into Isaac Mendez if fair use rationale can be applied. Otherwise, delete. However, speedy deletion on the basis of copyvio is inapplicable unless copyright infringement is proven by reference to the location of the original copyright. -- Black Falcon 22:58, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Changing to: keep or merge without most images per below. -- Black Falcon 18:04, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep without most images I support keeping this article because although the paintings are all from one individual, many of the paintings actually affect major events in the show. In addition, the article provides information on how the some of the artwork is produced for the show. After reading Wikipedia:Fair use, I can agree that many of the images would not fall under fair use because they are not iconic. The only artwork that might be considered iconic in terms of the show is the nuclear explosion on Issac's floor, as this painting drives a main story arc throughout season 1 and is repeatedly referred to by various characters. As a side note, Artwork of Isaac Mendez is actually more of a Wikipedia:Lists than a standard article. This article's layout and style is closer to featured list Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc than to a featured article. If this article's information is merged back into Isaac Mendez, it will likely return as a list in bullet or table form instead of becoming prose. - fmmarianicolon | Talk 23:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per fmmarianicolon. Some of the images are okay, while I do agree that some don't fall under fair use.. A lot of these paintings are critical to the plot of Heroes. ♣Tohru Honda13♣ 00:28, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per fmmarianicolon and User:Tohru Honda13. dposse 16:56, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per fmmarianicolon, 23skidoo, and Tohru Honda13 arguments. 66.109.248.114 00:23, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per above articles, and maybe rename to something like List of Artwork Pieces by Isaac Mendez. JQF • Talk • Contribs 03:11, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - Borderline meets the FUC, needs more prose however, also should certainly not be tabulated. Matthew 13:00, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry, Matthew, but I don't understand what you mean by "tabulated". Can you please clarify? - fmmarianicolon | Talk 22:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per fmmarianicolon and User:Tohru Honda13. A rename/reformat of the page would be acceptable, but there's no need to delete. There is enough content in the descriptions (which provide insight into the plot of the show) to warrant its own page. Also, how is it not fair use if the images used are screenshots from the show?  Anticrash  talk  14:34, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete I don't see hwo this can fail to be copyvio. StuartDouglas 15:53, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
  • keep, but remove images. It was agreed to split this from the Isaac Mendez.--Ac1983fan 17:04, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep If we remove most of the images to avoid copyright violations. Otherwise, Delete. Valaqil 19:46, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.