Wikipedia:Files for deletion/Replaceable fair use/File:RomneyRally.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.

Shyam ( T / C ) 13:58, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Nope. These pictures are fair use. They come from Romney's offical public web site. They do not qualify for speedy deletion because they are fair use images. Do you have a replacement? The burden of proof is on you to find something because these are here legally and appropriatly.--Cliffhanger7 02:37, 4 December 2006 (UTC)Á
 * I'm afraid I must respectfully disagree. Our first fair use criterion says that fair-use images can only be used if "[n]o free equivalent is available or could be created". As such, the burden is on you to explain why an equivalent free image could not be created. &mdash; Chowbok  ☠  02:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok. This picture is of a rally that Romney attended. The only pictures that I can find of this rally on are from the AP, Reuters and the Boston Globe. These images have copyrights. We cannot use them on wikipedia. There are no free images. But this image is from Romney's site and is a proper fair use image. There is you statement. If you can prove that this is incorrect, and there are other images of this event that are free, please enlighten me. If not, this is a proper use of a "fair use" image.--Cliffhanger7 03:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

"If unfree material can be transformed into free material, it should be done instead of using a "fair use" defense." We have this defense for this image since it is from a public website produce by a state governemt. No free image exisits. Also this image "meets the second part of the wikipedia mission, producing a quality encyclopedia," by providing an image that is relevant and important to the page it is on.--Cliffhanger7 03:44, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * A free replacement could easily be created. It's a picture of him giving a speech in front of a flag. I doubt this is an unusual activity for him. &mdash; Chowbok  ☠  03:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually, if you take the time to read this page and understand this image, you will see that he is giving a speech at a Rally regarding gay marriage. According to my research it is the only rally he has given on gay Marriage. This is the "gay marriage secton" of this page. This very image at this very event is uniquely revelentent to this section. Any rally will not add what this picture does to this section. No free images of this rally exist, therefore this is the most appropriate image to place here.--Cliffhanger7 03:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Here is the caption (you obviously didnt read it): "Governor Romney speaks at a state house rally calling for the Massachusetts legislature to approve a public referendum that would allow voters to define marriage solely as a union between a man and a woman." Sorry, can't replace this.--Cliffhanger7 04:15, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Please, try to discuss this in a civil fashion. We can disagree about whether to delete this without taking it personally.


 * I did read the caption, but there's no way you would know from the image that that was where it was taken. I therefore don't see what this adds to the article, or to that section, that makes it irreplaceable. &mdash; Chowbok  ☠  04:21, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

The picture is about Romney and gay marraige. The section is about Romney and gay marraige. Do you not understand this? We do know where this was taken because of the caption and the link to the source provided on the page. The picture is appropriate and will stay.--Cliffhanger7 04:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * The level of discourse here is infantile. Please, let's be civil. Now, the issue at hand is whether the image depicts Romney giving a speech in front of a flag (replaceable), or whether it shows him giving a specific speech (non-replaceable). There are no visual cues that this is a specific speech, but we know that it is. There's room for good-faith disagreement about this without resorting to personal attacks. – Quadell (talk) (random) 15:00, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.