![]() | Scouting File‑class | ||||||
|
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 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)
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).
"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)
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).
![]() | Scouting File‑class | ||||||
|
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 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)
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).
"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)
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).