Image talk:Marcus00.jpg
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Fair use disputed
Copy {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to this page and give the reasons for your dispute on the talk page.
Possible reasons include the individual being a recluse or the photo being used to illustrate a particular point in the person’s career.
The rationale for uploading this photo is to illustrate an early turning point in Marcus Allen's career. This was his first big 'hit' (before this, he was a virtual unknown) which catapaulted him to porn star status. This young, smiling Marcus contrasts well with the older, later, grimacing and smirking Marcus/Timothy J Boham that committed murder.
- Yes, but {{magazine cover}} is very clear that we can't use magazine cover photos for this sort of purpose: " It is not acceptable to use images with this tag in the article of the person or persons depicted on the cover". Unless there is some good reason to discuss that particular cover image in the article, and it does do so, it goes. Daniel Case 16:23, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
I believe I already did. It was discussed that 'Marcus' was a virtual unknown in 2002 but when he won the 'Freshmen of the Year' vote and made the cover (2003), suddenly he became a pornstar virtually overnight, getting a job with Falcon. Actually, "Magazine Cover" is NOT "very clear". It says "may". Given that this magazine cover was clearly related as a turning point in the article makes it arguably fair use.→ R Young {yakłtalk} 03:47, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Like Lisa Nowak's before and after photos, I believe it is essential to portray both aspects of a person's personality. One of the convenient myths of society is that people who 'snap' and do bad things are somehow 'different' from everyone else. This myth allows us to think we don't have to worry or maybe we would never do that. Yet we often see that a person's career, life course, and circumstances can radically change. The apostle Paul was a murderer, too.→ R Young {yakłtalk} 02:29, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] OrphanBot and Wikipedia
Greetings,
For decades, science-fiction writers have been writing about the time when human decision-making will be replaced with cold, unfeeling robots. That day is here.
Despite the fact that Wikipedia editors are VOLUNTEER...
We currently have a system where images are deleted at will, even when the human decision was to KEEP. This is about more than just one image on one article. If people are going to spend the time to find relevant pics, they will want to know their efforts will be rewarded, not punished by some 'bot' that cannot be talked to and cannot indicate what is 'wrong' with what it deems WRONG. So far the WORST thing about Wikipedia is the picture-system. The current focus on having pics be free or fair use, instead of 'used by permission,' is ridiculous. Is Wikipedia simply a pass-thru mechanism, or an end-source of information? Why were pictures for Du Pinhua deleted? Certainly a 120-year-old woman isn't porn, and certainly the newspaper that printed it has little or no expectation to make money off the photo...most of these photographic images disappear after two weeks, anyway. Is it too much trouble to have a photo of someone? It has been said that a picture is worth a thousand words...don't make it cost that much as well.→ R Young {yakłtalk} 01:47, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
- There are two different issue here. (1) Is the image replaceable? The answer was no, so the image is not deleted under WP:CSD#I7. (2) Does the image have the correct image copyright tag? The answer is also no, so the image may be deleted under WP:CSD#I4 if it doesn't get one soon. The fair-use tags are at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Fair use, so go find one and add both it and a fair use rationale to this page, and OrphanBot will stop removing it. —Angr 05:14, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Just to comment, in basketball they have something called the 'no-look pass.' Teams that do the best often have a way of spreading the ball around to the best shooter at the right time. I have a lot of expertise, but image-tagging is not one of them. Is it too much to ask that if the problem is a technical one, the technical person FIX it instead of deleting...this concerns not just this article but dozens of others, from Cruz Hernandez to Du Pinhua...articles of 'marginal' importance to many, but which would be enhanced with a photo...photos are available but the current Wiki system discourages photo addition, and I'm not going to waste my VOLUNTEER time with something that will be deleted quite frequently by a computerized program. → R Young {yakłtalk} 11:25, 10 March 2007 (UTC)