Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Mike Tyson's tattoos

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bruxton (talk) 14:27, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Mike Tyson's tattoos

Moved to mainspace by Tamzin (talk). Self-nominated at 02:58, 3 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Mike Tyson's tattoos; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

  • Reviewing this below.


General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: for the main hook proposed and on ALT1 (which is from a full-length documentary that I don't have easy access to). The article was moved to mainspace on March 2 and meets the length requirements. Earwig shows no copyvios and in my check through sources, I didn't see any close paraphrasing. QPQ has been completed.

This is the first time that I've ever done a review where it's so clear to me that an image would make this an even better hook, in my opinion. We have a free image at File:BoxingHallOfFame 6 MikeTysonadmiringaMuhammadAliRobe cropped.jpg that I feel would be illustrative for both hooks and would meet all the DYK criteria for its inclusion. Either way, both hooks are good to go (great work). Nomader (talk) 04:35, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

@Nomader: First, thanks for the review. :) I'd love to use the image; however, I didn't propose it out of copyright concerns. As the article discusses, the coypright status of tattoos is unresolved in the United States. Absent clear legal guidance, the working approach seems to be one similar to c:COM:DEMINIMIS logic—assuming that photos containing all-rights-reserved tattoos are permissible when the tattoo's presence is incidental, but potentially infringing when discussing the tattoo itself (which is why I've included a quasi-FUR in a hidden comment in the article). Now, in this case, Whitmill has indicated he has no intent to limit Tyson's "right to use or control his identity", and that statement may well estop him from bringing any legal action against someone who photographs Tyson; nonetheless, I'm not convinced that using this image, in the context of the "warrior" tattoo, can truly be called free, in the same way that this image of me is freely licensed, but a crop focusing only on the quote from Dune on my right arm would be infringing (outside fair use). -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 06:08, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
@Tamzin: I started writing a rather long screed about how Tyson is a public figure, and therefore, there should have been no expectation by the artist that his work would not be photographed by fans and the art on Tyson's face used in such a manner... and then remembered that I am not a lawyer (although I sure felt like one when after reading your article, proposed using the photo anyways). I'll defer to your good evidence and judgement here and agree that the image shouldn't be used. Still, really fascinating article and great work on it! Nomader (talk) 06:51, 4 March 2023 (UTC)