These images are a lot better than the ones we have atm on the ranks page. Perhaps this could be cut up and used instead? --Mercifull 08:43, 19 May 2006 (CDT)
- As with all content per new policy, we cannot display unofficial rumor or conjecture. Technically the ranks that are "guessed at" with the current article should be removed, if I interpret things right. I also don't like how this graphic is displayed. While polished, the information on the creator and the copyrights leave me ill at ease and makes it look unblended in the article. (This was the reason I reverted a page containing this same image that another contributor added earlier this week.)
- Also, we need to mark this in some way that indicates its source and copyright, so cutting it apart is out of the question until we get the source and appropriate permissions of the image's copyright holder. If we can't get this shortly, however nicer this is, we can't manipulate it to the benefit of the article, nor can it stay in our image library, if I interpret policy correctly.
- (Updated) This image is marked "public domain" and I don't believe that's a correct tag. All likenesses of the show's content is de facto copyright of the show, including these badges. "Public domain" implies anyone can do ANYTHING to the image or the medium it appears, suggesting no one owns it. But Universal most definitely owns these likenesses of the ranks, so I will change the tag to point this out. It will likely be considered "fair use," but it's certainly NOT public domain, even if the creator of the image was the one who uploaded it. Universal owns what he drew. --Spencerian 09:31, 19 May 2006 (CDT)
- I was tempted perhaps this weekend to make some images of my own in photoshop to replace the current ones used. This would be much better than to cup up someone elses image. --Mercifull 09:41, 19 May 2006 (CDT)
- OK. I had to change the source tag to "no copyright" since this user has uploaded an image that (1) was possibly created by himself or someone else--I don't really know, and (2) NBC/Universal likenesses cannot be public domain. Merciful, if you have a knack with PS, this graphic does indeed show the spit and polish that would be nice to have in the article's pips, but we have to do things the right way and the contributor MUST tag the image and note the specific source themselves. We can't go searching the internet for sources--that's the uploader's responsibility. So, save a copy for yourself to work on, 'cause by Tuesday it will disappear without a proper tag and response from the uploader. --Spencerian 09:47, 19 May 2006 (CDT)
- I do believe that the uploader created it. A person with the exact same user name created them over on the TrekBBS board. --Talos 09:59, 19 May 2006 (CDT)
- I can appreciate that, but the tag was still wrong and he hasn't responded to my note on its source and the proper tag. We can't do this for him, assuming he created it. Per the rules, I have to delete it. He can always resubmit it later, with the proper tag. --Spencerian 08:56, 25 May 2006 (CDT)
- I do believe that the uploader created it. A person with the exact same user name created them over on the TrekBBS board. --Talos 09:59, 19 May 2006 (CDT)
- OK. I had to change the source tag to "no copyright" since this user has uploaded an image that (1) was possibly created by himself or someone else--I don't really know, and (2) NBC/Universal likenesses cannot be public domain. Merciful, if you have a knack with PS, this graphic does indeed show the spit and polish that would be nice to have in the article's pips, but we have to do things the right way and the contributor MUST tag the image and note the specific source themselves. We can't go searching the internet for sources--that's the uploader's responsibility. So, save a copy for yourself to work on, 'cause by Tuesday it will disappear without a proper tag and response from the uploader. --Spencerian 09:47, 19 May 2006 (CDT)
