Commons:Deletion requests/File:What about the children.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

File:What about the children.jpg

[edit]

Unused and out of scope, as it is not realistically useful for an education purpose.--GrapedApe (talk) 03:08, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. That text was ported over by File Upload Bot (Magnus Manske) (talk · contribs), so I've got no objections to it being trimmed, per the suggestion of Herbythyme (talk · contribs), above. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 17:52, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment It probably should be noted that Cirt has added the image to various articles [1][2][3][4] as a response to this deletion request. Hell, he didn't even bother changing the English image caption in the Non-English wikis. The image was unused prior to the nomination. --Conti|✉ 18:44, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment It probably should be noted that it's a useful image for such purposes, and it probably should be noted that users of other wikis are welcome to helpfully edit the caption as they see fit at those wikis, and it probably should be noted that if they edit the caption language that would be most appreciated by me! :) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 00:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Is adding images to other wikis solely for the purpose of keeping them on Commons against Commons policies? If not, why not? --Conti|✉ 01:31, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That was not the sole purpose, you assumed incorrectly. -- Cirt (talk) 01:33, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, right. :) But it's nice to see that you admit that it was at least partially the motivation behind the additions. --Conti|✉ 01:36, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I did not "admit that", was merely responding to your incorrect assumptions in your word usage. But thank you for rethinking it over and changing to an assumption of good faith, I really appreciate that! Have a great day! :) -- Cirt (talk) 01:38, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Drive-by additions not withstanding, the image is pretty stupid, and should be deleted on general principle. No, that's probably not in policy, but it's just good sense.--GrapedApe (talk) 02:27, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep In use, automatically proves that it is useful. Sinnamon (talk) 03:09, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The image was unused and was solely added to other articles just so it will be within scope, so your argument is flat out wrong, I'm sorry to say. --Conti|✉ 11:22, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to say but the image is in use at Wikiquote, and it will remain in use there, so the argument of Sinnamon (talk · contribs) is flat out correct, I'm sorry to say. -- Cirt (talk) 18:18, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment If Cirt is going to add the image to articles, could he at least get the description right? here at the English article Children's Interests, he's got a caption "Usage of this style of [what-about-the-children] rhetoric..." but that not it at all, its ridiculing what-about-the-children rhetoric... so in that case information is being removed from the reader's brain which is not what we're about at all... I don't have an opinion on the merits otherwise, but its not clear to me if it was actually published anywhere, like in an actual flyer or online manifesto or something... if it's not, it's not an example of anything and it's misleading to say so. Cirt's original caption (at the Eglish Wikipedia) also said "Usage... by supporter of Electronic Frontiers Australia". He doesn't quite exactly say that Electronic Frontiers Australia ever used it (but it was sure implied). And he says "supporter" (but without the definite article)... I assumed a typo and that he had meant "supporters", but it looks like maybe he meant "a supporter" (on his Flikr page), so what good is that? What's going on here? The file description has a bunch of links, all which apparently point to places where it's not used, what's the deal with that? The source doesn't mention Electronic Frontiers Australia anywhere... if the gist of this image is "Here is an example of the kind picture that Electronic Frontiers Australia would use, if they used pictures like this, which they don't", isn't the only likely use of the file to mislead people about what kind of images is used by Electronic Frontiers Australia? (As was done at the English Wikipedia... I certainly had the impression that Electronic Frontiers Australia had used the image in its materials, until I looked into it more for this discussion.) This is not helpful. Herostratus (talk) 03:15, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Herostratus (talk · contribs), you make some very good points, I'll take them under advisement. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 04:20, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome. You also might want to not post the picture with an English caption on foreign-language Wikipedias. It's rude. Believe it or not, foreigners are not "faking it" and really do think that that gabble-gabble they talk is a real language. Herostratus (talk) 07:16, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Herostratus (talk · contribs), but, like I already said, above, I would be most appreciative if others wished to take initiative and edit the caption suitably to their languages. -- Cirt (talk) 18:07, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep I cannot pretend to have any great admiration for Cirt, nor many of his activities over many years, and I in fact consider many of his attitudes and behavior despicable in more ways than I care to specify. Having been the victim of what I consider slanderous cross-wiki attacks on my reputation and presence on many projects AFTER he had made what I believe was a clearly immoral and policy VIOLATIING block on me years ago, the effects of which I continue to be IMPRPOPERLY burdened by, I consider his sometimes vociferous support for free speech and against censorship rather self-serving, shallow and hypocritical, but as someone with a genuine, profound and abiding opposition to censorship or any needless destruction of options, who sees no clear reason to delete this image, I can ally myself with this person who I have MANY just reasons to resent or rebuke, and support retention of this image. It was brought to my attention by its removal from the Censorship page at Wikiquote. Though I can understand some rank its value as low, I did restore it to the page there with a caption using a quote of Oscar Wilde, in The Critic as Artist (1891): "An idea that is not dangerous is unworthy of being called an idea at all." I believe this is a proper and just use of the image, and wish everyone well, whatever their opinions in regard to these matters. Blessings to all. ~ ♞☤☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 13:13, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep I probably should have made this clear earlier - the image should be kept - it is within scope. --Herby talk thyme 13:26, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment An entirely unrelated issue I just noticed: The image contains a Second Life avatar. Those avatars are usually bought or taken from various sites, and are rarely created by the users themselves. Do we know that the person who created the image also created the avatar? If not, we're having a copyright issue here. --Conti|✉ 13:41, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment No need to keep this open any longer on COM:SCOPE issues. It does get a little tiring to keep hearing editors complaining about others finding uses for images. Sometimes DRs can serve a purpose to find uses for images on our projects. So it is a firm  Keep on scope, but the underlying copyright of the image may present a problem. Perhaps someone, Cirt perhaps, could contact the Flickr user and enquire about the copyright of the pertinent parts of the image? If there are any problems with that, then it's a firm  Delete russavia (talk) 16:02, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Russavia (talk · contribs), I'll try to get in contact with that user. -- Cirt (talk) 18:06, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Update: I've forwarded to Commons:OTRS confirmation that the Flickr user releases this image via license CC-BY and that the same Flickr user is the creator of the Second Life avatar used in this image and that is also released via CC-BY, as well. Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 14:30, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Confirming that OTRS has been received and processed. All looks good. russavia (talk) 14:44, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much, perhaps you could remove your {{vd}} from the last part of your comment? -- Cirt (talk) 14:45, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'll do you one better. russavia (talk) 14:47, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: I was originally going to close this but due to the possibility the avatar was not copyright compliant decided to hold off and raise that issue. Now that OTRS is complete, there is now no need to keep this open any longer, keeping as in scope as seems to be the general consensus, particularly as it's now in use. russavia (talk) 14:49, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:What_about_the_children.jpg&oldid=92455739"