Commons:Deletion requests/File:Whambo in '84.gif
The resolution really sucks! This graphics editor is capable of far better work than this mediocre crap. Please overwrite with a version that shows your true skills. Canoe1967 (talk) 07:49, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
- Any more resolution and I'd be tempted to show more bellybuttons. There is a crowd of people, hmm, maybe a belly-button-fest-protest. :) delete ! boo ! hiss ! Penyulap ☏ 07:56, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Keep. Withdraw as nominator after response from creator.--Canoe1967 (talk) 07:59, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
- I like to see it deleted, because it is finished, I know that sounds strange, but it's like a maṇḍala sort of thing, or art is a living thing, once it's finished growing and changing, it dies. I mean, look at the original concept of slapping someone with a fish, when John Cleese and his crew did it, it had something, but look at the institutionalisation of it now, the humour has been trampled into the dust under the concrete and oil stains of the highway of bureaucracy. Penyulap ☏ 08:18, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Speedy Keep: not a valid rationale for deletion.Does it matter? Mono 04:10, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Delete - The issue of "parody" images has been discussed recently at COM:AN in relation to another of Penyulap's images. As in the other image, this uses an identifiable person in a way that portrays them in a negative light and therefore violates COM:IDENT. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 03:23, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- Images must not unfairly ridicule or demean the subject. He's not done up as a jet pilot slaughtering women and children, doesn't have the body of an octopus, isn't saying anything damn stupid either. COM:IDENT is not even a policy, it's a guideline.
- So please, you embarrass yourself by not reading a dictionary first, but aside from that, on what planet is this considered to be 'negative' ? oh yes, planet you said so. Perhaps a 2 minute google of parodies of Jimbo Wales will show just what negative is. With no shortage of trolls on the project, phobias, people with their mouse in one hand and most photographed subject in the other hand, any serious work is too good for this place. I've already said it, and will say it again too good for commons, delete. Penyulap ☏ 04:25, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- Odd, I don't feel embarrassed. I'm sure you are right that there are worse images but that doesn't mean Commons should retain this one. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 15:17, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- So please, you embarrass yourself by not reading a dictionary first, but aside from that, on what planet is this considered to be 'negative' ? oh yes, planet you said so. Perhaps a 2 minute google of parodies of Jimbo Wales will show just what negative is. With no shortage of trolls on the project, phobias, people with their mouse in one hand and most photographed subject in the other hand, any serious work is too good for this place. I've already said it, and will say it again too good for commons, delete. Penyulap ☏ 04:25, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Comment This image from Penyulap I actually do get and understand completely. As to deletion, I'm staying out of this one. russavia (talk) 03:45, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- Keep make the trolls work for their dinner. Nothing wrong with this image. His mom wouldn't shriek in horror at those eyebrows. The look on Jimbo's face doesn't make nuns feint. Penyulap ☏ 01:21, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
- Delete. Still possible copyvio. --McZusatz (talk) 09:32, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
- well it's PD, so it needs no attribution, and I've expanded the description in case you'd like to go looking for it. Penyulap ☏ 10:11, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
- Hang on a second, all of the sources ARE given. I was under the impression from the diff given that the logo wasn't there, however a closer look at the diff shows that it IS there and IS attributed. Penyulap ☏ 12:05, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Well? if it is supposed to be a copyvio, what part of it is supposed to be a violation ? more information please. Penyulap ☏ 09:08, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
While the Parody clearly places Jimbo into his leadership capacity and is therefore a Parody of either his leadership (at a stretch) or the intended parody of wiki administration in general, I would think this page and this page may give light to the question of what Jimbo thinks of Parody. I don't know if there are others, I didn't look, and gave up asking on his talkpage when he was evasive or disinterested (I prefer to think of it as stage-fright that held his tongue :) whatever) I hardly see how Wikipe-tan could pull this one off, you just need any old face, somewhat like in 1984. Doesn't need anything else special about it, and isn't derogatory or unfair because it doesn't need to be at all, just needs to be a face on the screen and that's all it is, a copy of the face in '84 (not even wearing lipstick like in that link given). Penyulap ☏ 05:32, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
Kept: No real consensus to delete the file. In-use personal files fall within Commons' scope. FASTILY 08:56, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope. Comparing Jimmy Wales to a fictional murderous and ruthless dictator in neither kind, nor is this in use as a political parody of some sort, indeed we have better illustrations for this educational purpose at Category:Political parody. Fæ (talk) 23:21, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep – Per my comments at the Santorum discussion and the "Moratorium on user-generated art about living people" discussion. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 23:34, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
