Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Óðinn/Templates/Fair use screenshot

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was Delete all as unusable by policy that each use have it's own non-free rationale.. Courcelles 09:35, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

User:Óðinn/Templates/Fair use screenshot

 * User:Óðinn/Templates/Fair use audio
 * User:Óðinn/Templates/Fair use book
 * User:Óðinn/Templates/Fair use DVD
 * User:Óðinn/Templates/Fair use game
 * User:Óðinn/Templates/Fair use game screenshot
 * User:Óðinn/Templates/Fair use logo
 * User:Óðinn/Templates/Fair use promotional
 * User:Óðinn/Templates/Fair use screenshot
 * User:Óðinn/Templates/Fair use TV screenshot

A template like this would be deleted straight away in the mainspace- there is no possibility of a generic rationale for a screenshot of a film, as each image will be showing a different thing for a different reason. Users should not be able to get around this by hosting the image in the userspace and then transcluding it in the file space. J Milburn (talk) 00:10, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Note: I have added a number of other similar templates to this nomination, as they all ought to be considered together. I agree with J Milburn that there is no such animal as a "generic fair use rationale". In addition, I note that we have too many license/permission/FUR templates already in the main template namespace; additional private variations are a problem even when their contents aren't. — Gavia immer (talk) 00:25, 24 September 2010 (UTC)


 * TfD is elsewhere. these have to be discussed where people who consider templates will see them.   DGG ( talk ) 03:29, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * This kind of template (specifically, the one I originally nominated, and some of the others) have already been decided to be completely invalid, for the reason I explained. Moving them to the userspace does not suddenly make them ok. Would you send pseudo-articles stored in the userspace to AfD? J Milburn (talk) 10:21, 24 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep all Without any prejudice, I suggest that userspace is far more tolerant than templatespace is. User is active - let him, on his own, decide to delete or not to delete. Meanwhile, WP:DEADLINE awaits. Collect (talk) 11:03, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * ...Yes, but when they are being used as templates, we have to judge them as templates. I would have no objection to these just sitting in the userspace, but when they are in use... J Milburn (talk) 16:25, 28 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Move to template space and/or delete Templates like these are not "random content templates", they are templates purporting to cover licensing issues. To the extent they are capable of being used, they need to be used as templates and subject to community review for wording and appropriateness, not held in userspace as userspace material. No material is capable of being "confirmed okay" by a license template that's held in userspace. Therefore these templates are either:
 * unused and could be confused with formal project templates ( -> delete), or
 * used (or potentially used) and should exist in templatespace (not userspace) as formal licensing templates ( -> move), or
 * used (or potentially used) and redundant or undesirable as project templates ( -> delete or fix or delete)
 * FT2 (Talk 21:51, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * None of them fall under the second category. Audio, the various screenshots and "promotional" are undesirable- each individual usage will be for something specific, and having a general rationale for them is not possible. The others are redundant to (and worse than) the various templates of the likes of Template:Album cover fur. J Milburn (talk) 21:59, 29 September 2010 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.