Alphax (Wikipedia email) wrote:
Joe Anderson wrote:
Cool Cat recently created an article called Starfleet Uniformshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfleet_Uniforms, and it was nominated for deletion as cruft and OR.
The screencaps/promo photos in the article, IMO, acted as a reputable source. I mean, how else (canonically) are you going to know about the uniform switch between TOS and TNG? Using a book is not canonical, and therefore is surely not [[WP:V]].
There are such things as Star Trek encyclopediae, which report canon and real life (and probably not fanfic/other non-canon).
While the TV shows are canonical (as are the movies (except where continuity fails, cf. /Enterprise/)), using a screencap is close to original research and on dangerous ground wrt. using "fair use" as an excuse for copyright infringement.
So using a picture from the secondary source would be somehow more free than using a screen capture?
If one draws from a Star Trek Encyclopedia, comparing what is said there with the original source is still important. How else are you going to know whether the Encyclopedia information is accurate?
I seriously question the notion that using material from the original movie or book is original research. The original research was done by the author of the book.
Ec