Commons:Deletion requests/File:2016 Summer Olympics opening ceremony 1035326-olimpiadas abertura-4006.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Unfortunately, this is not an artwork permanently located in a public place per COM:FOP#Brazil. This particular cauldron incorporates kinetic sculpture, so it has a lot more "art" in it than usual, and appearing in a stadium during a ticketed event probably doesn't count. There is an official cauldron in a different location; would it count under FOP? ViperSnake151 (talk) 14:40, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
- Keep: This is exactly an artwork permanently located in a public place per COM:FOP#Brazil. This artwork specially created for this public places. --sasha (krassotkin) 15:28, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
- Keep: The kinetic sculpture is a prominent, not to say major, feature of the 2016 Olympic Opening Ceremony. Unless there is a serious challenge on the grounds of copyright it should be kept on historic grounds. Lee M (talk) 19:46, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
- Keep: This artwork is an important part of the 2016 Summer Olympics. I see no reason why it should be deleted. Ethanlu121 (talk) 00:42, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
- Comment: None of your comments factor in legal implications of "public place" and "permanently". There are two cauldrons. The one in the opening ceremony was effectively temporary. Then, in some countries a ticketed event makes the place "private". ViperSnake151 (talk) 01:45, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
- The law has in mind the difference between permanent and accidental, unwittingly, etc. This is not a part of the opening ceremony but is a part of an architectural structure of the Olympic bowl. We have all these photos because we believe it is a public place. --sasha (krassotkin) 06:03, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
- ' Delete this article says It was designed to be moved from the Maracanã Stadium to another site in Rio after the opening ceremony. The sculpture was not intended to be in the stadium permanently, thus this photo is not covered by FoP. A photo of the sculpture at it's final site will (almost certainly) be covered. I recommend uploading the image to whatever relevant Wikipedias under fair-use. The main draw of the sculpture is the movement, so having a still 2d image of it doesn't detract from its value. And since it will never be in the stadium again, and the opening ceremony only happens once, there is no replacement for this image. 2606:A000:4D00:4600:1097:CF9A:66F:BC81 11:58, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
- Further comment. Krassotkin's comment above does not take into account that the sculpture will be moved - and it was always intended to be moved. Lee M and Ethanlu121's comments do not address the issue of FoP. Try to remember that this discussion deals with keeping the image on the Commons or not - it says nothing about it's fair-use potential (which is allowed on some Wikipedias). 2606:A000:4D00:4600:1097:CF9A:66F:BC81 12:03, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
- The text we have says artwork permanently in public places. It doesn't say that the artwork has to be static, or only at one location. If the intention of this work is to be on permanent public display, it would seem that the FoP criterium is met. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:48, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
- Any sculpture is a creative work and each can be moved to other place. However, Freedom of Panorama Law applies to them, unless expressly stated another there. COM:FOP#Brazil does not have these restrictions, in contrast, for example, COM:FOP#Russia. --sasha (krassotkin) 16:59, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
- In fact, the cauldron that's actually on display is different from this one (i.e. the actual flame has a "pedestal" attached to a stand, and the kinetic part looks a little different. Remember Vancouver? They actually did have two cauldrons. One was for show in the ceremony, while the other was installed and lit after it. ViperSnake151 (talk) 21:39, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
- Further comment. Krassotkin's comment above does not take into account that the sculpture will be moved - and it was always intended to be moved. Lee M and Ethanlu121's comments do not address the issue of FoP. Try to remember that this discussion deals with keeping the image on the Commons or not - it says nothing about it's fair-use potential (which is allowed on some Wikipedias). 2606:A000:4D00:4600:1097:CF9A:66F:BC81 12:03, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 10:58, 20 August 2016 (UTC)