Talk:List of Lost episodes/Use of images

message: As this is an episode list - it is only giving brief summaries of each episode. As such the screenshots are not being used to illustrate a particular point in the text of the article, and so are not permissible under WP:FU. While they are a nice visual cue for people who have seen the episodes, this does not qualify them as fair use. Fair use should be kept to an absolute minimum, not once every two lines of text. Contrast the usage here with the usage in Episodes of Lost (season 2). ed g2s • talk 20:18, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can point to several other episode lists that have pictures next to the episode descriptions.  Here are some.  List of Star Trek: DS9 episodes, List of South Park episodes, List of Prison Break episodes, List of Family Guy episodes for starters.  I don't understand why you deleted these since they add to the page.  Lumaga 21:36, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Mass removing images this way without discussing it first will be considered as vandalism, your changes has been reverted, people have changed images many times to match fair use criteria, if you have some images which you don't belive matches with the episode discription then please list them and state your reason as why to change them, thank you --mo-- (Talk | #info |  ) 21:52, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Mass addition of copyright images without a fair use claim is considered copyright vandalism. Citing other lists that break this rule does not justify this page. Please read my comments again. Finding an image that "matches" the desciption does not make it usable. Fair use should only be used on Wikipedia as a last resort, not just when we can find a suitable image that makes the article look good. ed g2s • talk 10:19, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Screenshots 

message: While there are arguments back and forth on this issue, I haven't heard a single argument as to why the DVD covers for Season 1 and 2 are not necessary or fair use.  I think they're very necessary in order to help someone identify a particular season, and I don't believe that either image is copyrighted.  Why can't these two pictures be put back up? --Kahlfin 05:46, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The covers consist of a silver/gold (season1/2) background, the LOST logo, a panoramic image of all the characters (so small as to be utterly useless and the number 1 or 2. How do these images add significantly to anyone's understanding of the first season of Lost? The only part of the DVD that is mentioned are its release dates (edit: and the disc count). If we had an article discussing the DVD in greater detail, then it might warrant a picture. ed g2s • talk 00:07, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

text: You haven't explained why words alone don't suffice. Wikipedia is not a place to sell or purchase DVDs; nothing you have given as argument so far has anything to do with our goals as an encyclopedia. There are a million DVD-selling websites out there with lovely pictures of the boxed sets, I presume when people decide to purchase the DVDs they will have no trouble doing so.  --Fastfission 00:34, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree with you, but that's not the reason that ed g2s gave; he said that there isn't enough information about the DVDs for them to be shown (CDs with their own articles obviously do have enough info).  However, in response to his statement, I would say that it is important to have them in this article in order to help someone researching this topic to identify the product.  Currently, information on the two season DVDs of LOST cannot be found anywhere else in Wikipedia: this is the only place that anyone can find information on them.  Thus, I think it's important to have a picture so that someone doing research on them can see what they look like.  If and when they have their own article(s), there doesn't need to be a picture here but until then, I think a picture is a necessary contribution to the information given about them.  --Kahlfin 01:26, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree completely. Just look at the text from Template:DVDcover:"It is believed that the use of low-resolution images of DVD covers: 1, to illustrate the DVD in question 2, on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law."-- Ned Scott 11:20, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think once all this image bullshit blows over we'll be able to put back all the images. -- Ned Scott 11:22, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: DVD covers

message: Started again down here because the one up there was getting really crowded and hard to navigate. I am adamant that our use of screenshots is in no way a copyright violation. Some people think they are being used for decoration but this is nearly always a misconception. I don't know about other articles, but certainly on List of Stargate SG-1 episodes, the images were chosen very speicifically to aid commentary on the related episode. The images display something unique or particularly memorable that marks out that episode. Furthermore, they are the same images that are used in the individual episodes' articles, where they aid a much more detailed plot commentary and are referred to more directly.
In short, for someone who doesn't know the shows, the images may look like decoration, but they are selected to be illustrative and informative - and if not, they should be. Really the debate should be that, because if the images are being used properly and are low resolution, they do fall under Fair Use laws, so there is no reason at all why we cannot use them. It is likely that we would not be allowed to publish them in paper, but that is not the same for this web version of Wikipedia. -- Alfakim --  talk  13:16, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, from what I can tell, fair use should still allow for use to publish it on paper.  The media that Wikipedia uses shouldn't matter for the policy. -- Ned Scott 13:49, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that they do fall under fair use because they are not just random screencaps but exist to illustrate the episodes' major plot points, which falls under correct usage of fair use.--Zxcvbnm 20:59, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Screenshots debate 

message: It appears that the debate (wherever it was archived to) has a reached the point where we go about in circles, arguing from completely different premises and failing to convince either side of the other's position. The reasonable thing to do now which would obviously benefit both sides is to restructure the article. (Will expand later.) Johnleemk | Talk 10:11, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A solution 

message: A request for unprotection as been made at WP:RfPP; however, I see the debate is still quite heated, and I would like to know if there is consensus for or against unprotection before taking any action. Thanks. AmiDaniel (talk) 03:19, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure about the article merge issue, but the image issue is in hot debate.  If the page is unprotected then most likely myself, and others, will restore the article to an images included version.  Hey, I can be honest :).  Anyways, I think the image discussion needs more attention before that can happen.  Maybe we can make a sub-page in the talk namespace with a copy of the article, for those who wish to continue edits to the text? -- Ned Scott 03:38, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Seeing as numerous administators have made it quite clear how the policy applies here, anyone readding the images will be reverted immediately for copyright vandalism, so do to so would be foolish. ed g2s • talk 16:49, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are admins who don't agree with your interpretation of fair use. But it shouldn't matter if they're admins or normal editors.  Besides, the images are still hosted on Wikipedia, you did nothing.  If there is a copyvio, then that copyvio still stands. -- Ned Scott 01:00, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

text: You Don't seem to understand you role as an Admin.  You are solely a user with tools.  You have Even told me on another fair use issue that you were not using your admin privileges so your misconduct should not result in losing these privates.  If you are going to argue that you should not loose you admin privileges for improperly enforcing Fair use if you did not use your admin privileges then you have no right to say Admins have more of a say in this issue than regular editors. You only have more tools not more voice.  You are Consistently inconsistent.  You started removing Fir use images from other people's user space before you removed it from you own.  The Talk On this issue is externally long because These are different interpretations of the policy.  Saying it is Fair use vandalism is wrong because their is clearly no agreement as to what the Policy is.  You should be directing you efforts to Find free alternates to replace copy righted images.  Not removing the copyrighted images.  The Policy in a nutshell says when a Free alternative is available you must replace the fair use alternative.  We can argue all we want about fair use But if this page was protected to enforce Fair you the admin who protected it Abused his Protecting privileges because he was inducing a copy.  If this admin waited for your removal before blocking then he should be De-snyped.  As i understand This is Just a really Unfortunate Coincidence on his part and I am going to Assume good faith that Despite his Close  connection with you on this issue and his Clear Endorsement of a Correct version that It is just unfortunate that he happened to Protect the page after your edit and that he has to deal with the suspicion now.  If he Did Protect the page in order to enforce Fair use he should have left a Statement on the page.  The current statement says he does not endorse any version and the Talk about this issue is not going anywhere.--E-Bod 02:09, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "The Policy in a nutshell says when a Free alternative is available you must replace the fair use alternative." - this clearly shows a lack of understanding of the policy. The policy in a nutshell is "as little as possible, when it is absolutely necessary" as all fair use is harmful to Wikipedia's main goal of collating free content. The point about administrators here is that they were drawn to the discussion without any bias towards keeping the images as fans of the show. There is a very clear agreement to what our fair use policy is amongst those who understand the values of Wikipedia, the people who were around when the image policy was drawn up. Not the Lost fans who analyse the syntax of the policy and take an interpretation that allows them to keep their images on the page. I don't mean to sound elitist, but understand that just because there is no consensus on this page, does not mean there is no site-wide consensus. ed g2s • talk 00:08, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok My Nutshell Policy was not that accurate.  However I am Not a LOST fan.  If i was a lost fan I would have found a free alternative.  As far as Admins being neutral.  No admits are not neutral.  You specifically Advertised this page on the Fair use Page to Bring Users who supported your interpreting of the Fair use policy.  Your advertising of this issue is in no way neutral POV.  How would you like it if i went though you talk page and left a message on each of the talk pages of users who have told you to stop Enforcing Fair use.  I could Easily Get a landslide of Votes To keep all the images.  Then you can go further and Find another Category of Wikipedian who will Vote your way.  This Type of Recruitment of Specific Voters is Inappropriate Conduct for Wikipedia.  Most users who Oppose your interpretation of Fair use Actually Edit Articles and Don't Spend their time on All the Voting Pages talking Endlessly.  They actually are contributing.--E-Bod 01:50, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Yess and no.  If Wikipidia is reproduced and we abide by fair use our mirrors wil not be violating fair use.  alos  if the above statemnt was a policy we wouln't have the fair use tag becose we wouldnn't use fair use.  Ed.  You represent an Extreemly Small minority of users.  You guys just happen to assosiate yourselves with likeminded people.  This is degrading the wikipidia comunity.  Sure fair use is less than idial and I can understand how the fair use images on this page are exessive but you are an Extremest.  If wiipdidia was only filled with Extremests we would never get anywere.  You are Verry dispruptive of our other Wkipidia Goals--E-Bod 02:34, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unprotection? 

message: :::I Like Brain's Idea of Fair use, However i would like to note that fair use on Wikipedia is Very Complicated mixture of several different goals and can not be Boiled down to anything.  In fact our fair use Policy was a Gread Comprimise the way it is now.  Some wanted to not allow fair use on Wikipidia at all.  What's the point of having content if it is not Free?  There are several issues.  Please add to the list below--E-Bod 02:44, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikipedia in general and Fair use

message: From what I've read in this debate on adding/readding the DVD cover images into the article, there was neither a clear problem with their use (can use Template:DVDcover) nor a clear conclusion.  Debate on screenshots in individual episodes aside, is it safe to put the images of the DVD covers back?  --  Wikipedical 16:16, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess this should be discussed here.  --  Wikipedical 16:19, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conclusion with question on DVD covers 

message: On List of simpsons episodes which is FA they show the dvd covers. here is their justification.
    * Image allows for identification of the DVDs and television season in question
    * Image provides illustration to the claim that DVD box set is available
    * Image is provided free of charge by Fox Home Entertainment for publicity/promotion purposes
    * Image has not been altered from its original state, other than being scaled down from print to web resolution
    * Image is a web resolution (72-120dpi) copy of the DVD cover art
    * Image could not be used to make illegal print copies of the DVD artwork
    * Image does not limit the copyright owner's rights to sell the DVD in any way
I believe that this article can apply similar rationale. --larsinio (poke)(prod) 18:34, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use of dvd covers

message: From List of Simpsons episodes, I asked why they were able to have them.
: I recall a minor objection in this page's featured list candidacy to the DVD covers for not being low-resolution. The fair use laws only extend to low-resolution DVD covers. As long as proper fair use rationale is used, I don't think this page has the same problem. --McMillin24 contribstalk 13:03, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Featured does not mean perfect - nor are the people who vote on featured lists experts on our image policy. The DVDs are barely discussed, let alone the covers, therefore we can't use the images. ed g2s • talk 14:42, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "The DVDs are barely discussed", again, policy does not give a text-amount requirement.  The article is multi-subject.  It is no different than a collection of stub articles. -- Ned Scott 19:12, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

text: As I have previously stated on your talk page, instead of just removing the images you should join in on the discussion.  I see you pointing out many problems, but offering no solutions.  There is plenty in the DVD topic below that you can reply to. Jtrost (T | C | #) 14:46, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So if the dvd release dates are added, would it then be able to be used? --larsinio (poke)(prod) 14:47, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Do changes need to be made to the fair use rationale for the images? I added much to the rationale of the images, which I believe makes it appropriate. Correct copyright staus is one of the crieteria to become an Featured list. List_of_Fullmetal_Alchemist_episodes and List_of_Oh_My_Goddess_episodes is also FA which uses DVD covers. Stargate SG-1 episodes contains a a one sentence reference to the image.  I would suggest to ed g2s, if he is firm in his beliefs about the inellgibility of these images to remove these from tehse featured lists first to elimnate said confusion. --larsinio (poke)(prod) 14:57, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The more that the text of the article addresses the image, the more likely it is to be fair use. And with respect to the South Park list, people participating in the featured article nomination did bring up fair use as an issue (they questioned whether the images could really be used), but they didn't go into it too deeply because they felt they didn't know enough about fair use. --bainer (talk) 14:59, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have already addressed these issues in the other DVD topic. Jtrost (T | C | #) 15:10, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Re-adding dvd covers

message: Here is just a few other articles that use pictures for every episode:
*List of Star Trek: The Next Generation episodes
*List of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine episodes
*List of Star Trek: Voyager episodes
*List of Star Trek: Enterprise episodes
*List of Family_Guy episodes
*List of South Park episodes
*List of CSI: Crime Scene Investigation episodes
*List of Invader Zim episodes
*List of Home Improvement episodes
Now how come the majority of episode listings can use images, but the Lost article can't? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.165.190.155 (talk • contribs) 
:I was just coming to post something similar. I've been a long-time observer of this little war, but haven't bothered to chime in yet. But recently I've been doing some reading over at the List of South Park episodes. See, they had this exact same discussion a while back, about fair use of the images within the article. Only, instead of getting into a revert war about it, they talked reasonably, and came to a reasonable conclusion. And not only were the images were able to stay, but the page then became a Featured List! An example of what other lists should strive for! A list, with images, as featured... believe it or not. Not so long ago, this page looked much like that one. Then it got butchered, every single image, box cover, anything like that was removed, and now it looked horrid, and is pretty useless because I don't have time to scroll through and read all that text without having the image prompts there to help identify what I'm looking at. So, in one fell swoop, some people here managed to take a page that was almost the same as a Featured List, and turn it into useless, ugly, crap. How is this improving the Wiki esperience? And what does this say about Featured Lists? They're something that we should strive to NOT look like, because if we do it'll all get pulled apart? Why is this list being held to such different standards than another list, that achieved Featured status based on the same template we're using? I'm confused... --Maelwys 20:22, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is the Lost Article being targeted for images? 

message: There doesn't seem to be a lot of recent discussion here so I'm unprotecting. --Tony Sidaway 23:02, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Upon further re-reviewing this whole discussion, it seems the bickerings between editors has taken the issue of screenshots in this List nowhere.  There is no clear consensus on the inclusion of screenshots as well as how to proceed.  I think you are correct in saying that restoring screenshots will lead to page protection.  In addition to Pktm's request to know if we should revert on sight, I implore editors to comment on how to proceed to settle this issue.  --  Wikipedical 03:16, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The discussion has moved on to Wikipedia:Fair use/Fair use images in lists for now. --bainer (talk) 03:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Unprotecting