File:JessicaWild.jpg ( talk| | history| logs| links| watch) ( article| restore)

I deleted this image as F7: violates fair-use policy as the image shows a living person and a free-use substitute could be created. The pic shows a contestant for a TV show in and out of drag. The original uploader would like the deletion discussed or reviewed. If I could get a review of my decision that would be great. Thanks. Diannaa ^{( Talk)} 18:50, 20 April 2011 (UTC) reply

• Endorse, fails WP:NFCC#1 and probably WP:NFCC#8 too. Stifle ( talk) 19:09, 20 April 2011 (UTC) reply
• Endorse generally living people are considered to fail WP:NFCC#1 even when creating such a picture would be difficult. In this case the Jessica Wild article states that they appear at venues and events throughout the United States so it doesn't even sound like it would be that difficult. I'll note from the admin's talk page: "I understand the rationale; however, these files were unfairly tagged after my edits were targeted by a vindictive anonymous user." - it's unfortunate people get into disputes and that can lead to bad feeling, increased scrutiny etc. unfortunately regardless of the reasons someone listed them (without judging the underlying dispute) the images have to meet the standard, these don't so there isn't an "unfair" in this. -- 82.7.44.178 ( talk) 19:22, 20 April 2011 (UTC) reply
• Note - The underlying dispute is one of an IP-hopper aggressively hounding the contributions of the uploader. The one hounding has been using NHS IPs (at work - taxpayer dollars well spent, I guess) that have mostly been inactive for at the very least one year, some for as far back as 2007. There has been an excessive amount of vandalism from IPs in the same range. [1] [2] [3] Beginning in earnest on April 14, this user has been ruthlessly targeting Bouncehoper's every contribution, grossly misinterpreting policy and claiming that others are responsible for vandalistic edits literally sandwiched between his/her own. I don't know much about Bouncehoper's history prior to this, but something very strange is going on here. Whether or not the images fail NFCC's 1 & 8, I believe this to be a blocked or banned user who is doing the nominating for deletion. Not cool. The spouting off about AGF seems familiar. [4] They admit to being here for "5+ years" and never to have vandalized even once - virtually all the IPs they use have been used for vandalism even very recently. Doc talk 04:22, 21 April 2011 (UTC) reply

  To play devil's advocate a little, I can see some of the perspective of the IP in this, some of the edits in question like this and I can't say I can see a gross misinterpretation of policy in that (I'd probably agree with the, sophomore is not a common term here in the UK so I'd probably have to go look up what it means). Seeing the quiet update to the MOS [5] by the "complainant" here, the getting involved in reverting etc. I can see some frustration i.e. I can't see one side in this as completely innocent and passive. The methods of the IP certainly are problematic but there is not a totally unreasonable underlying issue, even if it has been blown out of proportion. But back to the issue here, I still can't see anything "not cool" or "unfair" in this, if the images don't meet the standards we shouldn't keep them around, two wrongs don't make a right etc. -- 82.7.44.178 ( talk) 06:34, 21 April 2011 (UTC) reply

I've spoken to Diannaa about this - the images will go; and a rangeblock will be put on the IPs the second they continue the hounding. The gross misinterpretation of policy includes, among other things, responding to my comment "The MOS is a guideline. WP:HARASSMENT is a policy. One that you continue to violate. Policy trumps guidelines. Are you able to understand this?" with "I haven't made any bad edits. So if anyone is being harassed that would be me from you. WP:CIVIL is also policy, you would do well to read it and preferably understand it." The user does not comprehend WP:CIVIL or WP:HARASSMENT, is gaming the system, and has outright lied about their activities. They are extremely likely to be a blocked/banned user. Doc talk 06:48, 21 April 2011 (UTC) reply

• Endorse. Fails WP:NFCC#1 I would say. I think this one was deleted just due to policy, no unclear matters here. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 ^{( Contact)} 18:01, 21 April 2011 (UTC) reply

Nobody is going to contest either the deletion of the images or Diannaa's decision. The background just needed to be revealed for clarity. This should probably just be considered resolved. Doc talk 21:47, 21 April 2011 (UTC) reply

I would love to contest, but on further review, the deletion should stay.

82.7.44.178, you'll forgive me if I'm a bit wary of IPs at the moment, but I'd just like to say in my defense, that yes, I should have discussed the MOS edit before doing it, but I didn't understand how the sentence how come to be there in the first place. I have since checked and seen a vague consensus, which, fine, whatever. *shrug* It's not worth it to fight a silly battle, especially if I'm only going to be hounded by someone when I do.

• le sigh* Sorry about the pics...wish they'd work...ah well. Thanks, folks.

Bouncehoper ( talk) 03:00, 22 April 2011 (UTC) reply

File:Ravendragqueen.jpg ( talk| | history| logs| links| watch) ( article| restore)

I deleted this image as F7: violates fair-use policy as the image shows a living person and a free-use substitute could be created. The pic shows a contestant for a TV show in and out of drag. The original uploader would like the deletion discussed or reviewed. If I could get a review of my decision that would be great. Thanks. Diannaa ^{( Talk)} 18:50, 20 April 2011 (UTC) reply

• Endorse, fails WP:NFCC#1 and probably WP:NFCC#8 too. Stifle ( talk) 19:09, 20 April 2011 (UTC) reply
• Endorse as for above image -- 82.7.44.178 ( talk) 19:29, 20 April 2011 (UTC) reply

File:MorganMcMichaels.jpg ( talk| | history| logs| links| watch) ( article| restore)

I deleted this image as F7: violates fair-use policy as the image shows a living person and a free-use substitute could be created. The pic shows a contestant for a TV show in and out of drag. The original uploader would like the deletion discussed or reviewed. If I could get a review of my decision that would be great. Thanks. Diannaa ^{( Talk)} 18:50, 20 April 2011 (UTC) reply

• Endorse, fails WP:NFCC#1 and probably WP:NFCC#8 too. Stifle ( talk) 19:09, 20 April 2011 (UTC) reply
• Endorse as for above image -- 82.7.44.178 ( talk) 19:29, 20 April 2011 (UTC) reply