File talk:ghoti oeufs sign.png

File:ghoti oeufs sign.png
Tagged with by  with the reasoning as follows: "Non free content not permitted on English Wiktionary". It was uploaded by, who gave a non-free use rationale at the file page. I personally have no opinion and no knowledge about Wiktionary copyright. --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:19, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Other nonfree images have been kept in the past (e.g. File talk:Far Side 1982-05-28 - Thagomizer.png), so whatever Meta says, in practice, Wiktionary does allow nonfree content. But in order to comply with Foundation regulations, we have to have an exemption doctrine policy. At the moment, we don't have one (AFAIK), so either we have to hammer one out or we have to delete the nonfree images we have. —Angr 09:27, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
 * If we are going to allow non-free "image citations" like this one, we would also need a process whereby non-admins could upload (or request upload of) non-free images for use in citation pages. On the whole, though, I don't see pictorial citations as being any more useful than simple text (such as thagomizer), and judging by Wikipedia's example, non-free files seem to be more trouble than they are worth. This, that and the other (talk) 12:11, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree that having nonfree images is more trouble than it's worth; I have long been opposed to them at Wikipedia. But I think it will take a community vote to decide whether we want (1) to prohibit nonfree files, or (2) to write an exemption doctrine policy to allow them. As for uploading images, Special:Upload isn't restricted to admins, is it? —Angr 12:31, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Um, yes... Special:Upload says "Permission denied" for me, a non-admin. This, that and the other (talk) 01:03, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Unless we are going to have a few people become knowledgeable about applicable copyright law, we are probably better off to delegate such matters to WikiCommons and restrict ourselves to images located there. Why wouldn't someone upload their image there to begin with? DCDuring TALK 13:06, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Because it's taken from a screen shot of a television program. This image would be deleted at Commons as non-free media. --EncycloPetey (talk) 15:20, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
 * As EP says: because it's copyrighted content, which Commons does not allow, but which we have allow and use under fair use rationales, because e.g. the picture of File talk:Far Side 1982-05-28 - Thagomizer.png is what identifies the object being described with that term, whereas merely the text of the comic would not convey that information or cite the use of the word in reference to that thing so clearly. Whether this image is necessary or a transcript could simply note [the screen shows a sign reading "The Ghoti Oeufs Caviar Company"] is not as clear-cut. - -sche (discuss) 15:37, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, we have allowed a small number of nonfree images under a claim of fair use, but without an exemption doctrine policy, we are in violation of Wikimedia Foundation rules by doing so. AFAICT we currently have four nonfree images here: File:Far Side 1982-05-28 - Thagomizer.png, File:ghoti oeufs sign.png, File:f-word-xxxx.png, and File:khw-superscript.jpg. The first two are being used on citations pages, the last two in discussions in project namespace (note that Wikipedia does not permit nonfree images outside of article namespace). —Angr 16:14, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Are we really that desperate for attestation and entries that we want to have copyright and licensing expertise or take risk without expertise?
 * Is it not quite irresponsible and ungracious of us to violate our generous host's rules? DCDuring TALK 17:20, 29 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm drafting an EDP for us to discuss now... - -sche (discuss) 01:41, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
 * See and discuss WT:BP. - -sche (discuss) 02:18, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. All the debate over fair use of non-free images aside, this image adds nothing that the transcribed dialog doesn't already have covered. It's basically a prop used to dress up the entry. Chuck Entz (talk) 07:22, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per Chuck. Of the four files Angr mentions, I see Thagomizer as necessary, and khw-superscript as preferable (but replaceable). I am persuaded that this file is unnecessary, and I have proposed xxxx for deletion. - -sche (discuss) 00:17, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per Chuck, sche. DAVilla 03:35, 9 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Deleted, since everyone agrees (even, in the BP discussion, the uploader). - -sche (discuss) 17:33, 9 October 2012 (UTC)