User talk:Brookette1
Replaceable fair use File:Katie_Linendoll.JPG
[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Katie_Linendoll.JPG. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:
- Go to the media description page and edit it to add
{{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template. - On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.
Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. feydey (talk) 09:50, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Re: Katie Linendoll
[edit]Hi, Brookette. If you work for a PR firm, you should have lawyers on staff, or at least on retainer. They should be able to educate you about intellectual property. =)
Wikipedia policy is to only use text that can be freely modified and distributed without restriction. It is very unusual for official text to satisfy those conditions. We also require that our articles be written from a neutral point of view, by referring to secondary sources that have written about the subject. Taking text from a PR firm that is employed by the subject of an article -- which would be considered a primary source instead of secondary -- risks compromising our goal of neutrality.
In other words, we prefer to take information about Ms. Linendoll from things like magazine articles, newspaper stories, and books, rather than from Ms. Linendoll herself, or people affiliated with her. It's not that we don't like PR firms, but PR firms have different goals than we do -- PR firms are looking to present their subject in the best light possible; we want to present subjects as neutrally as possible.
Now, photos are a different story. We love to get professional photos of our subjects, but they have to be released under a free Creative Commons license. You and Ms. Linendoll would have to understand that a photo released under a free license may be modified extensively and reused at will for any purpose. If that is acceptable, and you still wish to release a photo of Ms. Linendoll under a Creative Commons license, then please contact our "volunteer response team" at this link: Wikipedia:Contact us/Photo submission.
Thanks for your interest in improving our encyclopedia!
-- Powers T 14:12, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Nomination of Katie Linendoll for deletion
[edit]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Katie Linendoll until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.