Bryan Derksen wrote:
geni wrote:
On 7/22/07, Bryan Derksen bryan.derksen@shaw.ca wrote:
Actually, those conditions seem pretty reasonable and in tune with existing policy to me. But it allows album covers, book covers, all manner of screenshot, exactly the sorts of things that have recently become subjects of contention. So I'm not sure where the conflict lies here.
Getting the 2-3 sentances to be about the media in question. Most articles on albums do not talk about the album covers. Dito bookcovers. Screenshots may be slightly better but still people tend to include them without talking about them (for example the comment on [[Image:Ebay-homepage.png]] appears to be 3 words).
I think you may be interpreting things a little overly literally. The article is about eBay and the screenshot depicts what eBay "looks like" to the user. There's no need for the article to literally say "in the screenshot to the right, note the balanced use of color and perfectly straight lines used on the eBay homepage" in order to actually be discussing the subject of the image. The article on [[Jean-Luc Picard]] has a screen capture depicting the character but the article doesn't at any point have a section of text saying "in the screenshot at right, note how Captain Picard is bald and has a hawkish nose. The gleam of his scalp offsets the gleam of intelligence in his eye." The whole article is about the guy and that's a picture showing what he looks like.
(As an aside, I picked this example at random on the assumption that there'd be a screenshot there and when I actually visited the article to double-check that I found that the image tagged for deletion both for lacking a source and for lacking a fair use rationale. In both cases, the missing information is REALLY FREAKIN' OBVIOUS. Once again a case where it was just as easy to slap deletion tags on as it was to provide the information that would solve the problem, and yet the deletion tags were used. This is not optimal to say the least.)
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Or it could be that someone besides you thinks that the fair-use is not so "freakin' obvious" at all, and genuinely believes that the image should be deleted.
But far easier to blame laziness than address a genuine difference of opinion. I'll refrain from comment on the irony there aside from pointing it out a bit...