Caroline Ford a écrit:
Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 01:54:55PM -0800, Daniel Mayer wrote:
Jimbo wrote:
... If that means less images for now, then it means less images for now. It also means that we have a very strong incentive to develop free alternatives.
No it means that many things will *never* have images. For example, Dolly the Sheep is dead. The only images of her are either from the news media or from the Roslin Institute. Therefore I used the images from the Roslin Institute. The license on those images states that they can be freely used in a noncommercial setting so long as credit is given. I have done that.
Fair use is one thing but this has gone way too far. Image deleted.
And you lied when submitting that it is a free image. You should at least feel ashamed of what you have done. _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
And you should be ashamed by abusing sysop rights by deleting an image without discussion. There is clearly no consensus to delete images we have permission to use.
I don't understand why you think this is worse than fair use - this image is used entirely legally, unlike a lot of "fair use" images. It would also probably be illegal for a UK contributor to upload it under American fair use law.
I notice that it was quickly restored, and messages left on your talk page asking you to desist.
Caroline / Secretlondon
I must have missed a step one day. I thought image deletion was permanent. No ? I am always a train late :-)