This template is within the scope of WikiProject Sports, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sport-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SportsWikipedia:WikiProject SportsTemplate:WikiProject Sportssports articles
Assess : newly added and existing articles, maybe nominate some good B-class articles for GA; independently assess some as A-class, regardless of GA status.
What's the problem with using the logo? 192.160.62.60
Wikipedia policy as described at Wikipedia:Fair use criteria item #9 specifically proscribes the use of fair use images outside of the main article namespace. Thus, the use of fair use images, such as logos, is not permitted in templates. --Durin13:13, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I understand what your saying, but here's the thing, a Template is an EXTENSION of a main article, and an intricate part of many main articles. As such, logos actually ARE allowed on conference...and all...templates.
This is false. Please read Wikipedia:Fair use criteria item #9. The incluson of the logo is explicitly banned. Quoting the policy, "[fair use images] should never be used on templates (including stub templates and navigation boxes) or on user pages". Re-inserting the image is a violation of Wikipedia policy and constitutes a form of vandalism. Stop. --Durin18:51, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
To simplify matters: the policy states: "Fair use images should be used only in the article namespace. Used outside article space, they are often enough not covered under the fair use doctrine. They should never be used on templates (including stub templates and navigation boxes) or on user pages." Durin is wholly correct in this. — pd_THOR|=/\= | 20:26, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fair Enough...but I think Wikipedia should look into changing this polcy. I mean, honestly, are the copyright police going to come after you for a Template?...there should be some discretion 66.30.130.13322:46, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not much of one for rocking the boat; but I can see your point. I won't discourage anybody from trying to implement policy changes; I just prefer following it. /me shrugs. — pd_THOR|=/\= | 23:01, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"They wouldn't sue over this!" and similar arguments to support abuse of copyright is not an affirmative defense under fair use law. We must assume the institutions that hold copyrights to material are interested in protecting those copyrights unless we have proof otherwise. Thus, the fair use images must remain off of templates. --Durin01:01, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
First, WP:IAR is not policy, and even it were it it does not mean ignore all laws. Second, adding decorative images in violation of copyright law is not improving the site. Instead, it is placing it in danger of copyright/trademark lawsuits by the holders of copyrights who may be interested in defending their rights. It is most definitely not a "minor" thing to be sued. Even if Wikimedia won the case, the damage in fighting the lawsuit alone could be more than enough to shut this entire project down. Wikimedia does not have deep pockets. You can change policy by discussing potential changes on the talk page of the policy in question, or (probably better, for there is a larger audience) bringing up potential changes at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). But, be advised; the fair use policy is unlikely to change. --Durin03:18, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
