File talk:Office 2008.png

Edit war in this image
All right everyone, there is an edit war (or "revert war" or "resolution war" or whatever-you-may-call-it war) going on here: You guys keep putting in effect different resolutions of this image here and all of you sincerely think that you are just adhering to WP:NFCC (use of low resolution/fidelity image) and WP:NFC (minimum acceptable quality).

It is time for you guys to reach a consensus.

Now, as to my opinion: This image does not need this resolution war in the first place because:
 * 1,280 × 1,200 IS low resolution: This image is actually a compilation of six low resolution images. It is wrong to look at pixel numbers and call it high-resolution. (Otherwise, cropping the white space around it should make it more policy-/law-compliant!)
 * 1,280 × 1,200 is the lowest possible resolution that fulfills the non-free use rationale: These images (or shall I say "this image") should be large enough so that they can be used to identify Microsoft Office products for readers who haven't already seen these products. (Like me or any one who uses Windows and have never seen a Mac.) Otherwise, non-free rationale is not fulfilled. To better understand the concept of minimum acceptable image size, think like this: An imaginary person would nominate this file for deletion (or would sue Wikipedia for it), asserting that it is not an assortment of screenshots of Microsoft Office but an assortment of screenshots of the application he developed himself which have a vague similarities to Microsoft Office. Can you prove him wrong by just looking at the screenshots?
 * 1) High-resolution here will not pose a copyright threat because this image is NOT in fair use! Yes, this image is copyright-protect and non-free but is being used with permission from Microsoft corporation; and Microsoft corporation is not putting any restriction on resolution. Wikipedia also has no firm laws and if there is a consensus, you guys can simply ignore NFCC resolution clause and upload full resolution — Microsoft has already permitted it.

In the end, our goal is to have a file with stable resolution.

Fleet Command (talk) 06:54, 15 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Rebuttal, two years later
 * File:Office 2008.png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).
 * In my opinion (for every sentence which follows): this non-free image is not "a screenshot" (singular).
 * It is described by the uploader as a "combination of screenshots" (8 of them). It is laid out so as to be able to fight WP:NFCC minimalization on the grounds of "can't see or read anything if reduced" below 1280x1200, which exceeds NFCC smallest-possible-usable-size mandates by between 10x and 15x pixels.
 * It does not meet Microsoft's definition of "a screenshot", (Non-free Microsoft screenshot and links) or meet Microsoft's prohibition against "combining" or "modifying" screenshots.
 * It does not meet our definition of "a screenshot" (singular) either.
 * If the various components of Office are important enough to be shown visually with accompanying discussion, they should be separate screenshots.
 * Note: it is conceivable that users of Office on very large screens, or on 2-screen or 3-screen systems could lay out several simultaneous side-by-side windows and take a screenshot, but this is not a true example of that. IMHO it is visual WP:SYNTH, which, though RS sometimes do it, we typically do not. It is replaceable by a small number of much smaller non-free screenshots which comply with Microsoft's and our policies and guidelines, to communicate the same information. If this has been discussed elsewhere, point me there. Lexein (talk) 19:24, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Hello, Lexin.
 * You have dedicated three bullet points to introducing a problem that could be solved by simply changing "screenshot" to "screenshots" or "group of screenshots". Making the change would have taken less time of you than writing this. That said, these screenshot are neither modified nor combined. (They are simply put together in one file.) So, this image flawlessly meets all that Microsoft permission grant has required. Next, I have not heard of a rule that says "they should be separate screenshots". I think is at the uploader's discretion; and as long as he or she fulfill the use rationale requirements, everything is fine. Last but not least, "visual WP:SYNTH"?
 * Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 18:58, 17 April 2013 (UTC)