On 7/7/05, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
There are two important perspectives on this, the per item perspective and the overall perspective.
Periodically, each and every item needs to be reviewed, and the fact that one meets today's criteria for inclusion does not imply that it will meet those same criteria next year.
Of course, with 14,449 images tagged as fair use (I figured out a way to get a rough estimate using "What Links Here" and playing with the numbers in the URL*), this seems extraordinarily impractical. (To our credit, we have a whopping 46,520 pages tagged as GDFL).
(Which to me says, if we are not going to purge all of them, then we should try and subcategorize them into smaller fair use categories, similar to those used for book covers and so forth, but expand to other relatively "safe" things such as "historical images" and "headshots" and "large scientific instruments" or something like that.)
Beyond that there is no precise rule that can be established, but we do know that there is some imprecise point out there which will be over the top.
The straw that breaks the camel's back does not function in isolation.
This is somewhat true, but it should be remembered that we are dealing here purely with hypotheticals, that in "real life" it would come down to the discretion likely of one person (a circuit court judge, unless these are jury trials, but for some reason I don't think there are, but I might be remembering wrong).
FF
*For future reference, one can see this link to see what I did: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Whatlinkshere&limit=44... If you click, "Next 440", you'll see there are 9 more on top of that 14440. Whether that is exactly accurate or not depends on the behavior of "What Links Here" with Templates, of course, but this is probably pretty close to the right number, da? Am I not clever? ;-)