File talk:Kanye-West-grabs-the-mic-2009-vma.jpg
 | This file was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
Reason[edit]
What exactly is the reason for speedy deletion? I have the copyright and fair use tags on there. Shark96z (talk) 02:27, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
- Yes but please see Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria which is what's disputed. Bidgee (talk) 02:51, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
- Are you speaking of something like F11 on WP:CSD? If so, I guess I overlooked that... Shark96z (talk) 02:58, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
- This image is completely unnecessary. I doubt that anyone needs an image to show them how it would look like if a person were to hold a microphone. There is nothing unique in this image that cannot be explained in text. Gary King (talk) 05:35, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
- Can't explain it any better. Aaroncrick (talk) 05:37, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
- I don't know. I think it helps show the incident a little. I didn't get to see it, and this helps me believe that the microphone was more or less taken from her instead of asked for. Is a picture of a plane flying into a building really necessary for an article on Sept 11 attacks? I can imagine it pretty darned well. I don't like to, but I can...
- Personally I think that this would fall into the historic qualification, even though I typically don't hold arts and entertainment (contemporary) as being that historically important. Tigey (talk) 14:25, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
- I certainly understand what you mean. Probably the most important line in the fair use rationale for the 9/11 image is "Use of historic images from press agencies must only be used in a transformative nature, when the image itself is the subject of commentary rather than the event it depicts"; I'll see if someone else can shed some light on this. Gary King (talk) 15:29, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
- Gary King asked me to come here and explain my thoughts, so here they are: This article fails WP:NFCC#1 for Taylor Swift and Kanye West, as it doesn't illustrate anything particular about the two that couldn't adequately be covered by text. 2009 MTV Music Awards is a bit different, though I would have to say that it doesn't really match that as well. The reasoning for that is because this particular image does not show enough emotion on either West or Swift's faces. It seems to still be pretty early on in the incident, and neither has truly responded yet to make the image noteworthy. If one came across this image without the context, it almost looks like they are sharing the microphone. Perhaps if this image showed West being booed at the crowd while Swift looked truly shocked, it might be defensible, but this timing of this particular shot make it so that it likely doesn't pass our fair use requirements. NW (Talk) 18:58, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
- Quick question: NuclearWarfare, what do you mean by "neither has truly responded yet"? I ask because they have both responded, as in talked about the matter. Do you mean a longer talk about it? I doubt that there will be an extensive talk about it on their parts; for them, it is best left as is...with occasional mentions. Flyer22 (talk) 19:12, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
- Too late to help Flyer most likely, but for the sake of any lurkers...
- What I gather from the statement is that neither has "responded" at the time of the photograph. Not that neither of them have spoken about it later - there's no real emotion or anything in the photograph, as previously stated. He's just walked up, and for all she knows, is going to congratulate her. A F K When Needed 11:55, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
- Quick question: NuclearWarfare, what do you mean by "neither has truly responded yet"? I ask because they have both responded, as in talked about the matter. Do you mean a longer talk about it? I doubt that there will be an extensive talk about it on their parts; for them, it is best left as is...with occasional mentions. Flyer22 (talk) 19:12, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
- Gary King asked me to come here and explain my thoughts, so here they are: This article fails WP:NFCC#1 for Taylor Swift and Kanye West, as it doesn't illustrate anything particular about the two that couldn't adequately be covered by text. 2009 MTV Music Awards is a bit different, though I would have to say that it doesn't really match that as well. The reasoning for that is because this particular image does not show enough emotion on either West or Swift's faces. It seems to still be pretty early on in the incident, and neither has truly responded yet to make the image noteworthy. If one came across this image without the context, it almost looks like they are sharing the microphone. Perhaps if this image showed West being booed at the crowd while Swift looked truly shocked, it might be defensible, but this timing of this particular shot make it so that it likely doesn't pass our fair use requirements. NW (Talk) 18:58, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
- I certainly understand what you mean. Probably the most important line in the fair use rationale for the 9/11 image is "Use of historic images from press agencies must only be used in a transformative nature, when the image itself is the subject of commentary rather than the event it depicts"; I'll see if someone else can shed some light on this. Gary King (talk) 15:29, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
- Can't explain it any better. Aaroncrick (talk) 05:37, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
- This image is completely unnecessary. I doubt that anyone needs an image to show them how it would look like if a person were to hold a microphone. There is nothing unique in this image that cannot be explained in text. Gary King (talk) 05:35, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
- Are you speaking of something like F11 on WP:CSD? If so, I guess I overlooked that... Shark96z (talk) 02:58, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
I am not sure what to make of this debate. The ones arguing for deletion have valid points. But then again, such images are sometimes kept when there is substantial critical commentary regarding the moment or imagery itself. There is substantial critical commentary about the moment in all three articles. Recently, the image of Tom Cruise jumping on Oprah Winfrey's couch was kept, not only because the matter has substantial critical commentary in the Tom Cruise article...but also because it is a popular culture moment that relays the incident better when included. I am not one way or the other for the inclusion of the Kanye-West-grabs-the-mic-2009-vma.jpg, but I did tweak its licensing just moments ago. Also, it is currently only used in two articles, Taylor Swift and 2009 MTV Video Music Awards, and thus I also tweaked its fair-use rationales to reflect that. Flyer22 (talk) 01:17, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
- Keep it is an obvious keep image as it really provides a image of the exact moment the Kanye West incident happened on the VMAs 2009. I dont see the reason for deletion.--Judo112 (talk) 22:08, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
- Sometimes it feels like there is a number of users on wikipedia which just love having these kind of discussions and put up good images or articles up for deletion in a hurry before thinking.--Judo112 (talk) 22:10, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Keep it, it helps illustrate the moment in ways text never could. 19:29, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
- Keep — It depicts the moment that the event occurs, and a picture paints a thousand words - especially if you're looking at the expression on Taylor Swift's face. --Burningmace 01:17, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
- Keep the video footage of the actual thing is very difficult to find, so a photo on Wikipedia would be very necessary. MatthewWaller (talk) 21:25, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
