User talk:Pereza - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Arbitrary username (talk | contribs) at 17:46, 27 October 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 17:46, 27 October 2006 by Arbitrary username (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Welcome!

Hello, Pereza, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Misplaced Pages Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Where to ask a question, ask me or a helper Commander Keane on our talk page. Again, welcome!

If you want to tell me something or if you just want to say hi, leave your message under the Talk Section of | My Talk Page

Ω Anonymous anonymous Ψ: ''Have A Nice Day'' 23:10, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

The Original Barnstar

I award you this for all your kick-ass work on martial-arts related articles! Andeh 13:51, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, Theory and Technique

I'm not so sure that listing a book's contents (or even listing a book without reference to it's significance) is appropriate content for wikipedia, perhaps you should reconsider the content of this article. Senordingdong 21:52, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

See The Canon Of Judo to see where I'm headed on this article. To me, it's primarily a "Judo List", just like List of Kodokan Judo techniques or Lists of Danzan Ryu. If you take out the description of each technique in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, Theory and Technique, there is only 30 pages of actual text. As for the significance of a book published in 2001 :-?? A search of www.amazon.com and www.bn.com shows it to be the earliest book on BJJ available, at least at those sites. Try to create a BJJ list of techniques, you'll run into the problem I ran into, the reason I then did Kodokan first, and how I may try to integrate everything toguether. If there's anything else you want to say about the book, go ahead. Maybe I should tack on "stub"?

Disputed fair use images

I am writing to dispute the fair use rationale that you have provided for a lot of martial arts related images that you have uploaded, taken from one or more copyrighted films.

Fair use covers only the use of the images for identification and critical analysis of the film itself, not using them to demonstrate martial arts techniques. This might include at most one or two images in an article about the film itself, if it is notable enough to warrant one. I think the places where this can be most clearly seen is in Misplaced Pages:Fair Use#Counterexamples, as well as in the text of the {{Film-screenshot}} template that you have added to them.

This notice relates to the images listed below. You will notice that I have already tagged them as disputed fair use on the description pages, although in one case the image had already been tagged by another user.

Please note that under the Misplaced Pages:Criteria for speedy deletion, section I7 (images and media, rule 7):

Media that fail any part of the fair use criteria and were uploaded after 13 July 2006 may be deleted forty-eight hours after notification of the uploader.

and all these media were uploaded after 13 July 2006 (the earliest was on 8 August 2006). This therefore gives you 48 hours from date of this message until the images may be deleted by an administrator. If they can justifiably be retagged with a free license, then please could you do so within this time, providing appropriate justification on the image description pages.

Many thanks, Arbitrary username 08:41, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I think "for identification and critical commentary on the film and its contents" in {{Film-screenshot}} includes identification and critical commentary of the techniques covered by the film, its contents. BTW, we are talking about a freely available/dowloadable MP4 file providing content that is not easily replaceable. --Pereza 14:39, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

A couple comments about this.

Firstly, no it does have to be about the film. Have you looked at Misplaced Pages:Fair use? In particular, in the "Acceptable Use" section, images subsection, you'll see Film and television screen shots. For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television, and also the counterexamples section which I already linked to is full of examples showing how exactly the sort of use we have here does not come under Fair Use.
You referred to the "its contents" bit of "the film and its contents" in {{Film-screenshot}}. But it is not talking about "its contents" in isolation from the film itself, and this becomes obvious if you understand the tag in the context of the policy (which in turn will have been written with the ultimate aim of ensuring that users and the Wikimedia Foundation don't get successfully sued). With this in mind, let me try to explain with further examples of what "its contents" could and could not include. Suppose that you were writing an article about the film, and that (totally hypothetically) you had a quote from the IJF President endorsing or criticizing the demonstration of o-uchi-gari as contained in the film, which you wanted to include in the article. You might then under fair use be able to include alongside it the relevant screenshot from the film. You would be using it for critical commentary on the film and its contents. But you couldn't use it in a separate article on o-uchi-gari which wasn't really about the film at all.
You refer to the file as "freely available/downloadable", but I think all you actually mean by that is that it has been published on the web. The default status for material published on the web is that it is copyrighted. There is no legal freedom to copy and redistribute that content, even though you may download it and copying it is physically possible. If, on the other hand, the site where it was published included terms and conditions which licensed copying and redistribution under terms which are compatible with the license used on Misplaced Pages, e.g. public domain or GFDL, (and had the authority to do so), then we'd be in a position to retag the images and use them on that basis rather than relying on Fair Use. But I don't see anything that says this, and if it does then it's up to you, the uploader, to provide evidence of this.
You refer to "content which is not easily replaceable". I take your point on this, and you'll see in the Fair Use policy that the lack of a free equivalent is a necessary condition, but it isn't a sufficient condition.

Sorry to put a dampener on this because I see you've put a lot of work into splicing the film into sections to demonstrate the different techniques, but unfortunately we really can't just take whatever material we feel like from the web, use it however want on Misplaced Pages, and have it stand up in court. Regards,Arbitrary username 17:46, 27 October 2006 (UTC)