# Talk:Celebrity Number Six

One thing that remains unclear to me is how the photo ended up on the curtain. Some pictures adapted on the same fabric apparently came from Getty, which indicates they might have been licensed (though most likely still in violation of the terms).
Is (or was) this type of (likely) unauthorized adaptation of professionally taken photos or images of celebrities in consumer goods common in Europe? Such a product seems unthinkable in (say) the US, yet Anttila appears to have been a legitimate large business. Are moral rights and personality rights simply not respected/enforced/litigated in Europe (at least when it comes to products like this)? Nardog (talk) 01:13, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

As noted in the article, Escorsell says he did not license the use. It's possible he's wrong (sublicense, faulty memory, etc.), which is why the statement is attributed in-text, but if he's right, that wouldn't really surprise me. IP violations on textiles are pretty common, or at least that's my impression. And if this were litigated it's not clear who the liability would have fallen on—conceivably just a single subcontractor of Latky Mraz.  -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 02:39, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
I have little doubt that the use wasn't authorized, but what surprises me is that it was sold by a retail chain in Finland. I'd love some more context around this (if there are RSes). Nardog (talk) 03:04, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
@Nardog: I didn't come across anything like that, probably because accusing a big retailer of committing copyright infringement is probably not something you want to do based on someone's recollection. But I think it's inferable from the article that the print was probably unauthorized. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 04:55, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
Again, there's no doubt some rights (if not the photographers' copyright then definitely the subjects' personality rights) were violated in the production and selling of the fabric; I'm just wondering how prevalent that is in mass-produced consumer goods in Europe. Nardog (talk) 16:55, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

@Qwirkle, you've removed my comment on your talk page and suggested I go here, so here I am. What makes you want to delete this article? mwwv converse∫edits 23:35, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps you could explain why you want to keep it. I see it as ephemeral pop-culture, which is only important when it has some sustained presence. This does not yet, and I would guess will not, but it is entirely possible that some hand...or flipper, more likely... will write of this a few hundred years from now as the sort of idiocy that humanity thought was significant right before they roasted themselves. The fact that it is so excruciatingly badly wtitten is just gravy. Qwirkle (talk) 03:48, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
@Qwirkle: Well, I can't answer for humanity's priorities, nor for reliable sources' choices in what to write about, nor for the community's choice of what to consider notable. As to the part I can answer for, if there are prose issues you'd like to raise, I'm happy to address them. Or you could, of course, fix them yourself.  -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 03:57, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
So, from my viewpoint, the only suggestion you have is for me to put lipstick on your pig.  Seriously, now: if someone honestly considers an article not worth having, what point is there in prettifying it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwirkle (talk • contribs) 04:25, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
More that this is an article talkpage, and is supposed to be used for improving the article, not for levying vague insults. Are you just here to come up with different ways to say "your shit sucks", or would you like to help build an encyclopedia? If the former, feel free to not reply.  -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 04:31, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Which is conceivably, and probably accurately, why user:mwwv pinged me here, I suppose.  What you have done, however, is suggest to someone who thinks a topic doesn't really belong in a general encyclopedia at all, should work to improve the article. That's just silly. Qwirkle (talk) 04:54, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
No. You've said the article is excruciatingly badly written. That is not something anyone's ever said before about something I wrote, on-wiki or off-. So I take that charge very seriously, and want to know what to fix. But since you can't actually explain what parts you think are badly written, I'll just chalk it up as a lazy generic insult and move on with my life. See you around the wiki, hopefully when you're in a better mood.  -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 05:09, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Oh, dear. Complete with the mandatory declaration-of-victory-flounce. Again.If someone - anyone - doesn't see an article as needed, they have no reason to work on it. They have no reason, even, to have someone else work on it. It really is that simple. Qwirkle (talk) 05:33, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Your latter point is just completely false. From what I've seen (usually in draftspace), whenever someone (an AfC reviewer in the case of draftspace) says something shouldn't get an article, the creator of it and/or someone else will probably try to improve said article.  mwwv converse∫edits 12:04, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
You appear to have completely misread what I wrote. if someone (rightly or wrongly) sees an article as useless, why must they themselves feel a need to improve it?Sure, the original author might feel a compulsion. A passerby? Maybe.That said, I'm dropping this off my watchlist for now. Qwirkle (talk) 15:39, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi Tamzin and leeky, interesting read about citizen detectives, thanks.
I don't understand why some discussions called the print on the fabric a "silhouette". The original colour photo has been treated by one or more processes to be monochromatic before or during printing on the fabric, but it isn't a silhouette.
Also, in this sentence "The print consisted of eight black and blue monochrome silhouettes repeating", perhaps change "and" to 'or'? Thanks again, JennyOz (talk) 05:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Took a stab at fixing it! Will confer more with Tamzin tomorrow, might end up tweaking it again. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 07:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Thanks leeky, much better! JennyOz (talk) 06:30, 10 October 2024 (UTC)