Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/PMFri, 19 Dec 2008 17:16:19 +00002008-12-19T17:16:19+00:000516vUTC 39

Question about File:Lenna.png on Lena Soderberg
Don't know if this is the right place to ask, but there's a slow motion edit war starting over the use of File:Lenna.png in Lena Soderberg. The image is a Playboy picture (although SFW) of Ms. Soderberg, but has achieved some fame (the photo itself I mean) because it is used as a standard test image on many image processing scientific publications. Nobody seems to dispute the use of this image on Standard test image, but I do have a problem with it being used as a biography illustration on Lena Soderberg. Some argue that the woman's celebrity derives from this image but I would contest this as well.

I'm commenting here to avoid getting into an edit war. I'm sorry if this is the wrong place. --Damiens .rf 16:39, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I've commented in appropriate places, removed the image due to blatant violation of our policies, and requested page protection. --Hammersoft (talk) 16:50, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * If there is a better place for this discussion, please provide a link here. Dicklyon (talk) 16:55, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * For many of us, Lenna or Lena Soderberg is the only playmate known by name, certainly the only one to be an honored guest at an image processing conference, and it's because of this image. Her celebrity is in a different category from that of other playmates because of this image.  It seem absurd to me to have an article on her and not show the basis for her fame.  We can add a different image to identify her, but that does not detract from the need to comment on this image in her bio.  The usual fear of the deletionists, that wikipedia may risk the wrath of the copyright holder, is also clearly not applicable to this case. Dicklyon (talk) 16:55, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The fear isn't copyright wrath. The concern is upholding Foundation:Resolution:Licensing policy and our mission. Also, there are quite a number of playboy models who are famous for more than being a centerfold. Pamela Anderson comes to mind, as does Marilyn Monroe and Anna Nicole Smith. That for many of you Ms. Sonderberg is the only playmate recognizable by name is not a reason for including fair use imagery for depiction purposes. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:15, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes of course, I know those names, too, just didn't know they were playboy centerfolds. The point is, Lenna is the only one famous for a particular crop of her playboy centerfold, or at least the only one famous for such a use, even though she was not the first or only one to be used as such (the one that Larry Roberts used in his Master's thesis, with permission from Playboy, never became famous or standard). Dicklyon (talk) 17:21, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * This still isn't a reason for inclusion on her biography. Link the Lenna article on her biography instead. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:09, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The reason to include the image on her bio is to talk about the image, the basis of her fame; it is not a replaceable image, being a standardized test image, and is a low-res crop of the original copyrighted image. There is nothing in policy against using it, as it satisfies the 10 fair-use criteria. Dicklyon (talk) 04:44, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * See WP:NFC images #5. When we already have an article on the image, we don't need to use it elsewhere.  howcheng  {chat} 06:58, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, that's the first sensible thing anyone has pointed out, though it is just a guideline, not a policy. Dicklyon (talk) 07:04, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Guidelines don't necessarily carry less weight because they are guidelines. Think of it this way; policies are the 'law', guidelines are the description of how the law is put into play in current practice. Though guidelines carry some flexibility, it is wise to have a very strong reasons for stepping beyond their bounds. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:49, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * This is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever seen. If the image is going to be on wikipedia anyway, why on earth shouldn't it be used to illustrate her article?  Beyond that, #5 oughtn't apply, because the image is not to illustrate an article passage about the image (or, at least, not entirely to do so), but to illustrate what Ms. Soderberg looks like.  The criterion which would presumably apply would be #12, which is dubious - a free picture taken of Ms. Soderberg today would not serve the same encyclopedic purpose as the famous image of her from the 70s which is the whole reason that she is famous.  john k (talk) 15:58, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * There's a concept of minimal use. This is shown across the project. One example is the use of album covers. We don't allow their use anywhere just because they exist somewhere on the project. It is preferred that we should use fair use content (as appropriate) when it already exists on the project rather than uploading new content. But, it is also preferred to not use fair use content unless we absolutely must. The general practice is that if an image is used elsewhere, it is generally preferred to refer to where it is used rather than replicating it across other articles. --Hammersoft (talk) 16:42, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * This is how I see it - a musical artist's article, even if it includes a discography, does not include cover art of all their albums - to limit use, those are relegated to the pages on the albums. If the article on the Lenna test image got merged into Lena Soderberg's article, then so should the test image itself. But currently, the article on the woman should merely summarize her relationship to the graphics community, and direct to the test image article for details - details which include the image itself. Dcoetzee 04:57, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Perfect. --Hammersoft (talk) 16:30, 19 December 2008 (UTC)