Forums > Senate Hall archive > SH Archive/Gallery Deletion

Just so everyone doesn't get per the recent Mofference, I'm about to delete every single gallery on this site. This is purely so that we can get a list of unused images, and is not a permanent situation. Once we have listed all the gallery-only images, the galleries will be restored. This is so that we can either delete or use all gallery-only images, as they are a breach of fair use and thus illegal to be used on this site. Again, don't worry...not a permanent situation. —Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 15:17, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

  • All the galleries are now deleted, and the unused image list has jumped up to 1,327 files. I'm thinking that this was very much we'll list all the images so they can either be used in articles or deleted for good. —Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 16:36, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

The galleries are now being restored because the unused images have been located and listed. This is to be discussed here or in the existing unused image project thread. Do not remove an image from the listing without putting it in a proper article. -- Darth Culator (Talk)(Kills) 17:17, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Rather than put all 1,327 unused files in the Unused Images gallery. Can we just go back to putting up 150 every week in the Unused image project thread like was done before, until they are all dealt with? - JMAS 17:20, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Is Gallery of Jedi supposed to not be deleted? D'oh. --Imp 19:24, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I agree with JMAS! The list is to long to go trough it all at once. --Steinninn 09:04, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Can I get confirmation on one more thing? Just the images that are only displayed in galleries will be deleted, not the galleries themselves. Is that correct? - JMAS 18:00, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

  • That's correct for the moment. If Lucas Licensing ever contact us and ask us to remove the galleries, however, we will do so without question. Until then, however, the galleries will stay. —Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 18:16, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Of course, I never expected we'd blatantly defy LFL if they officially requested their removal. - JMAS 18:32, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  • This situation is too bad IMHO. Let's take the example of the galleries dedicated to a character: ok, some pictures in it are not used elsewhere. And so? Visual references are an IMPORTANT encyclopedic information, especially concerning the Star Wars universe, in which Lucas has always used the visual part to tell stories. I really think that a dedicated gallery is still useful, as well as the pictures in it, even if some are not used elsewhere. And I know what I'm talking about, I'm an illustrator, and when I'm on a Star Wars work, I always need pictures and pictures for reference. So, except if it's a demand of LFL, I'm really against this "picture-bashing"... -- Kaal 13:25, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
    • The problem isn't whether you a for or against it, or that this is "picture-bashing". The problem is the legality of having them around. We push the limits enough as it is, something that we can't even come up with a logical legal argument for needs to go. Yes, it's disappointing, but also necessary. Wildyoda 16:49, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
      • Right. To use these images by 'fair use', they have to support text, not just for show. -Fnlayson 19:17, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
        • By that argument, making sure each image in a gallery has a descriptive caption would be enough to meet that requirement. ;) - JMAS 19:31, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
          • Cute extrapolation. Text as in sentences and paragraphs.. -Fnlayson 20:12, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
            • Actually, if there were text (a few sentences) around most pictures, I think their remaining could be justified. Also, would it be possible to move images aside somewhere so that, should a reason for their being put on the site emerge, they could be added?
  • "To use these images by 'fair use', they have to support text, not just for show." And what about all those fan sites with tons and tons of Star Wars pictures, present just to be shown? I know a lot of them and they've never had any "legality" troubles. Sorry, but I really don't undrestand all that. Is it LFL who came to say "stop", or is it just worries of Wookieepedia admins? No offence in that, I'd just like to know. It's just that it makes me very upset cause, at that time, Wookieepedia is my main source for SW visual references... -- Kaal 22:47, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
    • We're trying to stay out of trouble with LFL by doing things the correct way. This is what we're been saying. We have more visibility than many SW sites. Is this making sense yet? -Fnlayson 22:52, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Whether Lucasfilm pesters them or not, they're still breaking the law. As for the impetus of this, recently a user began complaining about fair use violations to the Wikia staff. Rather than have blatant abuses for them to hang their hat on, we decided getting rid of the most egregious fair use violations was the best way to protect our use of images for less abusive purposes. jSarek 01:19, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
      • For the record, Imperialles and I have wanted to do this since long before Will started whining. He deserves credit for nothing. -- Darth Culator (Talk)(Kills) 01:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
        • Me too, but we've just *wanted* to set things straight; we never actually *did* anything until we got the kick-in the pants from him. jSarek 01:53, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
          • Hey now...add my name to that list...I wanted to do it too. —Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 01:55, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Ad blocker interference detected!

Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.