Wikipedia:Files for deletion/Replaceable fair use/File:AlexPorusCoin.JPG

Deletion?
The following, on my talk page: The reason I believe the coin images are replaceable is that someone could go to a museum or collection where the coins are located and photograph them. If you have information showing this is impossible, please present it on the image talk page. — Carl (CBM · talk) 02:28, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

My response: Finding a museum that allows you to take pictures would be difficult enough, but obtaining a picture of this specific coin, or a coin like it, that is equal in quality to the current one is, while certainly not impossible (how do you prove that anyway?), but it is definitely unreasonable. Museums are not overflowing with coins like this. Perhaps we should wait until an image of comparable quality actually exists before deleting, rather than stating hypotheticals. CaveatLectorTalk 02:33, 25 July 2007 (UTC)


 * That is not the way the policy is written. If a nonfree image can be replaced by a free image, even if the free image is not easy to make, we still deleted the nonfree image without having a replacement. There's no incentive to make a free one while the nonfree one is still here, so we would end up waiting forever if we didn't delete nonfree replaceable images before the replacements are waiting. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 02:40, 25 July 2007 (UTC)


 * It does say 'reasonably' replaced, and I feel that your nomination in this case is not within reason. CaveatLectorTalk 22:16, 25 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Do you have any evidence that the image cannot be replaced? Unless there is a reason to think the image is not replaceable, its face value is that it is, by locating a copy of the coin and taking a picture. Another problem with this image is that it does not mention the copyright holder, by the way. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 03:47, 26 July 2007 (UTC)


 * How can I give evidence for that? The statement 'this image cannot be replaced' is nonfalsifiable.  Can you prove that it is possible to be replaced?  Otherwise, what am I supposed to do, search the internet, and after that, the country and all the museums themselves to prove that a good photo opportunity to replace this one is impossible? CaveatLectorTalk 04:01, 26 July 2007 (UTC)


 * If you knew that there is only one remaining copy and it is in a private collection, and the owner refuses to allow it to be seen when contacted, that would be enough to show that the image cannot be replaced. Yes, if you want to use a fair use image, you need to demonstrate that it isn't possible to use a free image for the same purpose - we favor free images over fair use ones, so there is a burden on people who want to use fair use images to justify that they cannot be replaced by free ones. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 12:41, 26 July 2007 (UTC)


 * CBM, for your information, most of the coins from the "Indo-Greek" series that you tagged are unique specimens, which are located at the Cabinet des Medailles, Paris, where it is not allowed for the general public to take photographs of them. PHG 13:52, 26 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Another admin will review these deletions. To make it clear to them, for the coins that are in the Cabinet des Medailles, you should note this on the respective image talk pages. "Most" is not enough to know which images are replaceable and which aren't. Also, all the coin images need fair use rationales explaining why they cannot be replaced. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 14:55, 26 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Also, according to its article, the Cabinet des Medailles is open to the public, which does suggest that an image could be taken. Even if they ordinarily discourage photographs, it is conceivable that the museum would allow a photographer access to the coins in order to put the images on Wikipedia. They seem to have allowed other photographers access to do so. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 15:00, 26 July 2007 (UTC)


 * (edit conflict)I'm sorry, but I have to deeply disagree with the interpretation given by CBM. The text seems obviously clear to me: in the sentence "image cannot be reasonably found", you seem to have completely missed the word "reasonably". On the ground of this, these images don't even have to be unique: it's enough that they are very rare, and nobody with a minimum of history knowledge would doubt this.--Aldux 15:33, 26 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Reasonably does not mean "easily". &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 15:38, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but you haven't really awnsered: if your interpretation was correct, the text would have to say "image cannot be found", and only that without the word reasonably.--Aldux 15:46, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * (&larr;) Reasonably doesn't mean that it is easy to do, or fast. In this case, it is reasonable that the images could be replaced by making a deal with the museum to photograph them, or by having the copyright holder change the license. A fair use rationale for these images will need to explain why none of these options is possible. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 16:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No, CBM. 'Reasonably' means 'within reason'.  Your definition of what is 'easy' here is certainly your point of view.  Not to be glib, but if it's very reasonable to do this, why don't you hop a flight to France at do it?  If the policy actually had the spirit that you are citing here, then it would say 'if a replacement image can possibly be found.'  I'd like to ask whatever admin looks at these cases to consider precisely what is within reason. CaveatLectorTalk 21:40, 26 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree with other contributors that the 'Reasonably' clause seems to be misinterpreted by CBM, and that his interpretation of Fair Use is unduly narrow. Regarding the "Cabinet des Medailles", these is one Public Area, from which photographs can be taken freely (as this one), and a much larger Research Area, from which photographs cannot be taken by the general public. I know: I went there and asked. PHG 23:04, 26 July 2007 (UTC)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of a fair use image as a replaceable image. Please do not modify it. 

The result was to delete the image.

This image was tagged as replaceable. This assertion was disputed, and the reason given was
 * This image is claimed for Fair Use as it is historically significant and cannot be replaced easily due to the rarity of the coin

However there is no information about how rare this coin is, where any samples are located, whether any can be photographed, etc. Because of this, the image can not be seen to pass NFCC #1. Further, there is no information on the source or copyright-holder of the photograph, so NFCC #10 fails as well. Sorry. – Quadell (talk) (random) 23:47, 26 July 2007 (UTC)