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

Replaceable fair use disputed
I think the first fair use criterion is a weak criteria for deletion of a band promotional because it is up for interpretation. Sure, a free licensed image of the band could be created. But a band is not as easily accessable as a can of Coca Cola, they are four individuals and to get them in one place for someone to take a photograph and release it on Wikipedia is close to impossible. Also, I highly doubt that a free alternative would even come close to sufficiently depicting all members of the band, so that they could be easily identified. I see the point for sole individuals and for industrial products, but certainly not for musical groups comprising more than two members. --HarryCane 10:55, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I see your point, and that's why I haven't been tagging images of bands that have broken up. My theory with currently-active bands, though, is that one could take a picture of them at a show. &mdash; Chowbok  ☠  15:05, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * That's true, it still doesn't serve the same purpose since live pictures rarely depict every band member sufficiently to identify him/her. Take the Gnarls Barkley article for instance. Horrible picture, you couldn't make out who's who if your life depended on it. Which is a shame because the use in educational/promotional media is exactly why record labels release promo photos. --HarryCane 11:33, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Regardless, though, I believe this image is replaceable. – Quadell (talk) (random) 16:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Incorrect. Fair use criterion #1 states that "No free equivalent is available or could be created that would adequately give the same information [...]". A live picture of a band (the only kind of free picture available to members of the general public) does most certainly not give the same information as a professional promo picture. See for instance Bauhaus (band), where not one of the members is identifiable (the mist in the center is the lead singer, btw), the very information that is lost when favoring a "free alternative" in form of a live picture rather than a fair use one. --HarryCane 13:35, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry, that's reading way too much into "give the same information". Any picture with all four faces on it gives the same information, and could easily be made at a concert or other public appearance. —Angr 08:35, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * But I don't believe you will get a live picture where you can see all four faces in one shot (again, see the afore-linked Bauhaus (band)). Plus, that is the exact same reason why Image talk:Wheatus 2005.jpg was not deleted. A live picture of a band is almost never an adequate replacement for a fair use one, since usually not all faces are visible (see Gnarls Barkley, R.E.M. (band), The Darkness — all quality examples of how not to favor free alternatives over fair use). In these examples, you can (at best) see one of the members, which — in an infobox picture, where the priority should be being able to identify the members instead of showing a dynamic concert snapshot — has little encyclopedic value. --HarryCane 18:06, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

So far as I can see, this is still an unresolved issue. As such, I wouldn't feel comfortable deleting these at the moment. Arguments on both sides are compelling, to me. Other admins may feel differently. I have a list of pros and cons at User:Quadell/non-free photos of bands, and I'd love to hear any opinions there. – Quadell (talk) (random) 20:30, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * ''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.