[WikiEN-l] Artists' impressions

Fri May 19 07:12:54 UTC 2006

On 5/19/06, Erik Moeller <eloquence at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> In another case on de.wikipedia.org, a user created many fairly
> abstract drawings of celebrities and added them to articles. These are
> now all removed. There may have been copyright reasons for that, but
> they also looked a bit weird and out of place.

Somewhat like this image?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emo_%28slang%29

>From these anecdotes I would conclude that we have to be very clear
> that the picture is an original work and not a directly derivative
> one, especially not from a single work. In addition, there has to be
> general consensus that the picture accurately and neutrally depicts
> whatever it is meant to depict. Insofar as it is possible to cite
> sources, they should be cited.

It's funny just how true the witticism "Stealing from one is plagiarism,
from many is research" is. :)

Would we have any guidelines about how "sympathetic" to be to the subject?
Is it ok to leave pimples out? What expression should they have? What if
there are two choices of image for the lead?

Well, I suppose these battles exist anyway.

Steve