Wikipedia:Files for deletion/Replaceable fair use/File:Richard Ian Cox.jpg


 * 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.

FU disputed
Do voice actors tend to appear in public? I have no idea, so I'm not sure whether this is reasonably replaceable or not; I'm guessing this is somewhere along the spectrum between easily replaceable celebrities and recluses like the oft-cited Thomas Pynchon. --RobthTalk 07:15, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you for explaining your conserns at talk. Your initial tag was removed because you placed it without explaining what exactly you dispute. Using of the talk page by you greatly clarified the situation. Please do let the users know what exactly you dispute in each case so that they can address your conserns.


 * The image is given with an exhaustive and convinsing FU rationale. It is important for the article and in the absence of free alternative it should stay. At the same time if and when the free image that would reasonably replace this one becomes available, let's take a look at it and compare them for further usage. Example: PD mugshot of a hypothetical celebrity caught drunk-driving, especially when such celebrity is known for her good looks, is no adequate replacement for a professional publicity image as far as the article's content is concerned. Neither would a hand-drawing by am 8-year old kid released to the public domain by the proud parents. --Irpen 07:28, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * A couple of clarifications. I didn't originally add the tag. It is not necessary, when adding the tag, to add an explanation of why the image is replaceable.  It becomes necessary to do so if somebody disagrees and disputes the tagging (by adding the Replaceable fair use disputed tag and explaining why they dispute it).  As far as this image goes, the rationale doesn't currently explain why the image is irreplaceable.  The important question, in my opinion, is whether this guy makes public appearances (speaking engagements etc.).  If so, he could be reasonably photographed and this would be replaceable. If he does not make public appearances, I don't think this would be replaceable. --RobthTalk 08:10, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * This is him at a convention THIS IS A FREE IMAGE, GIVE IT A GODDAMN BREAK ALREADY, IM TRYING TO PLEASE EVERYBODY AND HERE WE GO AGAIN WITH NITPICKING NUTBAGS going after my stuff. JESUS H. CHRIST, just leave it alone!--Jack Cox 04:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)


 * This is not a free image, and it's replaceable. And there's no need to shout. – Quadell (talk) (random) 14:54, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * You don't seem to get that this is the second photo of Him i've tried to upload for christ sakes, I've had it with this crap. Now look I'm sorry but this sort of crap has made me start to hate lousy nitpickers who have nothing better to do then to make other people's lives miserable. I want you to understand that this has CAUSED ME IMMENSE PAIN AND SUFFERING because of a deletion of many images I uploaded. HAVE YOU NO IDEA HOW LONG IT TOOK ME TO LOOK FOR IT? Some of them are so hard to find and some of them are almost impossible to take a free photo of. What do you think I am some kind of reporter. You people make me physically and mentally ill, just talking about this kind of stuff makes me want to vomit. I do my best to help contribute to the site and this is how you reward me by ruining all my images that took me forever to upload and search for because of some stupid technicality. Many of the voice actors really do not care actually and the only ones who have, have requested I remove them and I complied. There is really nothing wrong with this and this is a complete over-reaction.--Jack Cox 05:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Speaking of overreactions... &mdash; Chowbok  ☠  07:52, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * ''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.