Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Kakapo

Kakapo
I have done a lot of work to rewrite this page, so I guess that would make it a self-nomination. I think the topic is interesting and highlights a critically endangered species. --Eudyptes 00:59,  8 Aug 2004  (UTC)
 * Support. 81.168.80.170 09:15, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. Very interesting piece. Angmering 10:49, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 14:55, 2004 Aug 8 (UTC)
 * Support. Revth 02:39, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Fantastic! Support.  +sj +  20:06, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. jengod 21:27, Aug 9, 2004 (UTC)
 * Object. Would support if the kakapo image had source and copyright information. Jeronimo 10:45, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * I noted the image has source information added, but judging by that information, the image is copyrighted. Jeronimo 18:26, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Added note. Wikipedia supports fair use of images. jengod 19:53, Aug 10, 2004 (UTC)
 * I'm not a lawyer, but don't think tagging "fair use" to an images makes it all well. I don't see any particular reason to call it fair use; the image was just ripped from a website. If we can do this, I might as well take a photo from the front page of my newspaper, and tag it fair use for Wikipedia. I don't think that will be allowed, but you might have to ask others with more knowledge on the subject. A better solution would be to write the owner of the site and ask for permission. Jeronimo 07:43, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Not as nice, but might be an alternative. It appears to be from J.G.Keuleman and Buller's Birds of New Zealand, which had a second edition in 1888 so will be out of copyright. -- Solipsist 13:17, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * There's now a new picture at Kakapo and all seems to be in order.   Does this resolve the problem?  Eudyptes  21:52 11 Aug 2004 UTC
 * Looks good to me. As far as I can tell the new picture is Crown Copyright (NZ) and I've added a tag to that effect. Not as good as Public Domain, but good enough. -- Solipsist 16:41, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Does that mean that the objection can be withdrawn? I'm unsure on procedure here.  -Eudyptes  00:21 13 Aug 2004
 * But the tag that has been added is misleading when it states that the image may be freely reproduced. The website in questoin states: "Material featured on this site is subject to Crown copyright protection unless otherwise indicated. Permission must be sought from the Department of Conservation for its reproduction." -- Emsworth 15:21, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * The image tag in question is the tag, which actually assumes UK Crown Copyright but is the closest match (not sure of the differences between UK Crown Copyright and NZ Crown Copyright, if there are any). Template_talk:CrownCopyright lists the usage with respect to various UK government web sites, but knows nothing of NZ. It may be that the notice on the www.doc.govt.nz site is not 100% accurate, but in the absence of any further information we should probably trust it and say that the image is not OK until permission has been sought. I hope that doesn't lead us back to Buller's Birds of New Zealand -- Solipsist 18:21, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Support, great article about a unique bird. Lisiate 02:28, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)