Image talk:Tere-tereba promo.jpg

The result of the debate was keep, nonreplaceable in the way it's being used in the article. —Angr 23:04, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

• This image was taken by the photographer for promotional purposes.
• This image is a press kit publicity photograph for Tere Tereba.
• This publicity photo is being used for informational purposes only.
• Use of this publicity photo furthers the intention of the copyright holder to publicize Tere Tereba.
• This publicity photo does not limit the copyright owners' rights to distribute.

And from Image:Teretereba promotional.jpg (duplicate image):

This photo is from the private collection of Tere Tereba, the subject in the photo. This photo is from a press kit for promotional and media use. The photographer granted permission for this photo to be used for mass media and promotional purposes; which was the sole purpose for it being taken. --MrEguy 05:08, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Our fair use policy forbids using a non-free image if a free image could be created that could be used in its place. See criterion #1 and counter-example #8. In this case, it would be possible to create a free image; therefore this non-free image may not be used. Whether a free replacement image exists or not at this time is not relevant. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 17:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I am using it here to illustrate the subject during a significant phase of her career in the absence of free alternatives. A current photo would not serve to show the subject, as she would be recognized and remembered during this time period. Therefore, a free image could not be created that could be used in its place. Additionally, in the article the subject is referred to as

"Once described as looking like Hedy Lamarr and acting like Lucille Ball"

further making the image significant and necessary for descriptive purposes, and not merely decorative.

Would you please explain your comment, "Whether a free replacement image exists or not at this time is not relevant." Thank you. --MrEguy 22:30, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

By my comment, I meant that if a free replacement image could be created, then the image is replaceable, even if no replacements exist at this time.

In regards to your comments, they would be persuasive. . . except that the image, as used in the article, is not used to show what the person looked like at one point in time -- it's being used to show what the person looks like in general. The image caption is simply "Tere Tereba", not "Tere Tereba in 1956" or whatever. Also, it is not used in the beginning of the career section, where her looks at that time might be discussed; it's used at the top of the article, where the person is identified. So long as the image is being used in this way, it falls into the category of counter-example #8 at WP:FU. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 17:45, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Quadell, thank you so much for your help. I'm new at this and really appreciate it. I've moved the pic down to the relevant section of the article and added the description "looking like Hedy Lamarr" so it's clear now that this is being used to illustrate that aspect; which is significant because that's what caused Warhol & Morrissey to notice her. Further, since the subject no longer looks as she did (at the time the photo was taken) no free replacement image could be created. MrEguy 21:49, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.