Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Images of Saddam Hussein

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I count 6 delete, 4 keep and 1 no vote. Rossami (updated by +sj)

It doesn't seem you counted my vote, then. from anthony
Comment: Actually, I interpreted your vote as delete since the discussion on the related talk pages did not seem to favor merging and since a redirect would create a circular link. Furthermore, since deleting the page does not affect the underlying images, no GFDL history is lost. WhisperToMe was the "no vote" in my tentative count. If I interpreted your vote incorrectly, please clarify it. In either case, as I said in the edit summaries, I've now voted in this particularly contentious debate and have recused myself from making the decision. Rossami 02:29, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
OK, I must have miscounted something else then. anthony (see warning) 11:24, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I moved the page to Wikipedia:List of images/People/Saddam Hussein and removed the fair use images, since it is against the policy on Wikipedia:List of images. 172 reverted me a couple times, even removing {{images}}, but he later gave up.

  • This was your first mistake, Guanaco. You shouldn't have moved the page in the first place, as both articles are quite different. Images of Saddam Hussein is for ALL images of Saddam which are not in the Saddam article, and Wikipedia:List of images is ONLY for public domain images. As I couldn't revert the mess you had made (ie. moving the page), I had to copy and paste to get the original page back. Guanaco, you have to calm down. Such unilateral acts are not permitted in Wikipedia. --Cantus 09:46, Jul 26, 2004 (UTC)

Cantus copy-and-pasted the old version back into Images of Saddam Hussein, calling me a "paranoid assh*** [sic]" in the edit summary. It is pointless to have a gallery of images that cannot be freely reused. When fair use images are used to illustrate an article, they are not the most important part of the text. If they were, they wouldn't be fair use. It is ridiculous for us to upload various images from various sources and claim "fair use" so we can put them in our gallery.

Images of Saddam Hussein should be deleted and redirected to Wikipedia:List of images/People/Saddam Hussein. Guanaco 01:43, Jul 26, 2004 (UTC)

  • Delete. Just delete, no redirect. It's a clear violation of what Wikipedia entries are not item 19: A collection of photographs.... I see there are currently both VfD and copyvio notices on the page. One is wrong, I suspect that it's not really a copyvio which would refer to the text of this page, rather it's the images that are alleged to by in copyright violation. What a mess. Andrewa 02:24, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    • The copyvio notice refers to the copy and paste move of the way the images are arranged and presented. Guanaco 02:44, Jul 26, 2004 (UTC)
      • Comment: That's not what the copyvio process is designed to deal with. Cantus has now removed the copyvio notice, I suggest we leave it off. Andrewa 20:33, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • Item 19 actually says: A collection of photographs with no text to go with the articles. Apparently, there is plenty of text in Saddam Husein article. Nikola 06:53, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete - Wikipedia:List of images is a better place for the free ones and we've got too many fair use images of Saddam as it is. Something needs to be done with the delinked non-free images though. -- Cyrius| 04:04, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. The images are taken from old regime footage. Saddam Hussein isn't going to sue Wikipedia. 172 09:29, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    • More to that point, he can't. Iraq does not have a copyright treaty with the United States. anthony (see warning) 23:47, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)
      That's a good point. Would that make the images {{PD-US}}? I still stand by this listing and the copyvio listing, because this is about what Wikipedia is not and the terms of the GFDL. Guanaco 00:02, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC)
      If you can show that the images were first published in Iraq, yes, they'd be PD-US. I don't understand your point on the terms of the GFDL. A list of 5 or 6 links is not copyrightable. I've asked on your talk page for you to explain it to me, though. anthony (see warning) 00:52, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. This page is different from the page at Wikipedia:List of images, which only lists Public Domain images. Thus this gallery is quite necessary, as it lists images which are not in the main Saddam Hussein article, which would otherwise be lost. Guanaco is on a nasty crusade to remove all non Public Domain-only images from the face of Wikipedia. --Cantus 09:27, Jul 26, 2004 (UTC)
    Wikipedia:List of images lists more than just public domain images. I don't think it's very fair for you to accuse me of being "on a nasty crusade".
  • Delete. I agree with Andrewa. This is a gallery of images. No matter the fair use/public domain debate, it doesn't matter, as this page is invalid. Lyellin 14:04, Jul 26, 2004 (UTC)
  • Merge with Saddam Hussein and redirect. Alternatively, delete. Please don't create a cross namespace redirect. We should be doing so only with extreme caution. anthony (see warning) 23:47, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • The main reason this was created was because 172 was objecting to having a huge amount of pictures in the Saddam Hussein article. WhisperToMe 03:53, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    • Creating an article which violates what Wikipedia is not is not a valid solution to an article dispute. If we added a significant amount of text about the images (the images themselves, not what is depicted in them), this would become a legitimate article, though. anthony (see warning) 10:15, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. How is this different than images of sheep or gallery of flags? Images of sheep is even mentioned on Wikipedia:Image use policy as an example of a way to use images. Nikola 15:33, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    • Comment: Good points. Gallery of flags (which is actually a redirect to Gallery of national flags BTW) is a different issue IMO, in that the article presents encyclopedic information in a purely graphical form. Images of sheep is a bit more complex, and currently also redirects to Wikipedia:List of images/Nature/Animals/Sheep. The Wikipedia:List of images project is in the project namespace, not the article, so there's a bit more leeway as to content. I was leaving the question as to whether this is itself valid until we decide on this page, because IMO if we keep this page, the image lists project clearly stays too. If we keep any of them, then IMO we need to change the image policy because Wikipedia will then include a gallery of images. No change of vote. Andrewa 21:23, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
      • List of images is a valuable project, and as you said it's not in the article namespace, but it serves different purpose: collecting of free images; if I understand it well, for example, it might even include images of non-notable people or places, if they are free. Now, Images of Saddam Hussein is in article namespace and has a different goal: illustrating the article about Saddam Hussein. The images are various, depict Saddam in various ways (Saddam in civillian clothing, in uniform, in propaganda, on a banknote...), perhaps one or two of them are redudant, but the bulk add to readers' knowledge about Saddam. Someone who reads article on sheep, has never seen a sheep and wants to know how a sheep looks like, should be presented with various images of sheep: ewe, ram, lamb, a flock of sheep, white sheep, black sheep, white and black sheep, various sheep races, depictions of sheep in art. Such images add vastly to his or hers knowledge on sheep even if not accompanied with a lot of text. Saddam is no different.
      • I have Opća Enciklopedija, an encyclopedia published in Yugoslavia; as examples, article about mushrooms has two pages of color pictures showing edible, unedible and poisonous mushrooms; article about illumination (art of beautifying handwritten books) is actually a three-sentence stub, but has a color page showing various illuminations, in addition to four black&white illustrations near the article itself; article about Greeks has two b&w pages showing Greek art; article about renaissance has two b&w pages showing renaissance architecture and art. Apparently, encyclopedias do have such a contents.
      • To sum all of this: IMO, both pages should stay. List of images/People/Saddam Hussein should contain free images of Saddam Hussein, for the purpose of having free images of Saddam Hussein at one place so that they could be easily found and used wherever needed. Images of Saddam Hussein should contain characteristical not-neccesarily-free images of Saddam Hussein for the purpose of informing readers of Saddam Hussein article how does Saddam Hussein looks like without cluttering the article. Nikola 06:53, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete this article - Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not item 19. Pictures should add to the article, not be the article. Note that deleting the article will not delete the underlying images. They are still available to anyone who wants to use them in an article that meets the standards. If you're that worried about losing track of them, I suggest creating a list of links (but not a gallery) on the main article's Talk page. Rossami 03:03, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep/move. VfD is not a place for working out policy disputes. No suitable alternative page been proposed for this full list of images; please work out where, if anywhere, this page should move to, on the article Talk page (perhaps Saddam Hussein/Images?). +sj+ 02:10, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)