18 Mar

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Gloryhole readyforservice.jpg

‎File:Gloryhole readyforservice.jpg
← Older revision
Revision as of 14:25, 18 March 2013
Line 12:
Line 12:

*# Are the subject's [[COM:PERSONALITY|personality rights]] violated? I think not, because a glory hole by its very nature is designed to obscure a person's identity, and this photo is no exception. Not only is the person unidentifiable from the photo, but the person presumably participated in an act that was specifically designed to obscure his identity. If this were a close-up shot in a locker room without indication of consent, I would vote differently. But in this case, I see no cause for concern. -[[User:Peteforsyth|Pete F]] ([[User talk:Peteforsyth|talk]]) 22:50, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

*# Are the subject's [[COM:PERSONALITY|personality rights]] violated? I think not, because a glory hole by its very nature is designed to obscure a person's identity, and this photo is no exception. Not only is the person unidentifiable from the photo, but the person presumably participated in an act that was specifically designed to obscure his identity. If this were a close-up shot in a locker room without indication of consent, I would vote differently. But in this case, I see no cause for concern. -[[User:Peteforsyth|Pete F]] ([[User talk:Peteforsyth|talk]]) 22:50, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

***Your second point gives the impression that copyright concerns are only valid with obvious copyright violations. That's a bit puzzling. I can only repeat my point here: This was uploaded by a throwaway account, with offering pretty much no source, who stated that he will "retire" his account and start a new one in another edit. I'm all for assuming good faith and all that, but this is just a tad bit over the line for me. Shouldn't we be especially critical when it comes to sexually explicit pictures? --[[User:Conti|Conti]]|[[User talk:Conti|✉]] 23:05, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

***Your second point gives the impression that copyright concerns are only valid with obvious copyright violations. That's a bit puzzling. I can only repeat my point here: This was uploaded by a throwaway account, with offering pretty much no source, who stated that he will "retire" his account and start a new one in another edit. I'm all for assuming good faith and all that, but this is just a tad bit over the line for me. Shouldn't we be especially critical when it comes to sexually explicit pictures? --[[User:Conti|Conti]]|[[User talk:Conti|✉]] 23:05, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

+
**** I don't see any particular cause for concern, and a search on [http://tineye.com TinEye.com] doesn't turn up any other copies of the photo on the web. I don't think your position is entirely unreasonable, I just don't see any particular reason to doubt the authorship of this file any more than a picture of a flower (i.e. as you mentioned above.) -[[User:Peteforsyth|Pete F]] ([[User talk:Peteforsyth|talk]]) 14:25, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Gloryhole_readyforservice.jpg&diff=92817204&oldid=92785448