File talk:Acorn Cambridge Workstation advert new scientist 1986-04-24.jpg
 | This file does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Further to the previous attempt to resize this image, I've just tried it at 359 × 457, which would (almost - I made a slight error) satisfy Fbot 9. But the main descriptive text is still unreadable so I've not uploaded it. -- Trevj (talk) 09:01, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
- It is a tough one. How important is the text in the image? Matthew Thompson talk to me bro! 11:27, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, indeed tough. I've now added a summary of the text to the article. The current resolution (680 × 864) is not a usable substitute for the original work and therefore could not be used for deliberate copyright infringement. Regarding WP:NFCC#8, its omission would be detrimental to [readers'] understanding, which could also apply to the text. I suppose the text could alternatively be included as a quotation within the article, but too much of that would give undue weight... unless moved to a new article at Acorn Computers advertising. -- Trevj (talk) 14:26, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
- I think it might be OK for now...especially because the company doesn't exist. I'm gonna grab an admin for their opinion. Matthew Thompson talk to me bro! 00:18, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
- Frankly, it's not clear to me why it is necessary to include this image in Acorn Computers. Sure, it's an advert for the product, but it doesn't add significantly to a reader's understanding and could easily be replaced by text/quotes. So again, if the text is what's important, consider quoting it in the article instead. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:37, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
- Aha - so that'll probably give 7 days to change things in order to justify its inclusion then. -- Trevj (talk) 06:31, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
- Frankly, it's not clear to me why it is necessary to include this image in Acorn Computers. Sure, it's an advert for the product, but it doesn't add significantly to a reader's understanding and could easily be replaced by text/quotes. So again, if the text is what's important, consider quoting it in the article instead. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:37, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
- I think it might be OK for now...especially because the company doesn't exist. I'm gonna grab an admin for their opinion. Matthew Thompson talk to me bro! 00:18, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, indeed tough. I've now added a summary of the text to the article. The current resolution (680 × 864) is not a usable substitute for the original work and therefore could not be used for deliberate copyright infringement. Regarding WP:NFCC#8, its omission would be detrimental to [readers'] understanding, which could also apply to the text. I suppose the text could alternatively be included as a quotation within the article, but too much of that would give undue weight... unless moved to a new article at Acorn Computers advertising. -- Trevj (talk) 14:26, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
