Talk:Weep (band)

Images

I'm not entirely sure how this editing process works, but the issue at hand is that Eric "Doc" Hammer expressed on his official Facebook page that he does not approve of the existing image of himself that is present on this page. It is related to his other work with The Venture Brothers and not with Weep. There are other pictures to choose from that are indeed owned by Mr. Hammer, but in the meantime, it would be better to simply remove the existing image since it is entirely unrelated to Weep. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.114.37.59 (talk) 19:32, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Addendum: The following is the link to Doc's facebook page where this discussion can be read by anyone in doubt. Since the concerned party is the artist himself, it seems quite logical to me to honor his wishes and remove the image until a suitable replacement is found. [1] 134.114.37.59 (talk) 19:37, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

With all respect to Mr. Hammer (who I am a huge fan of), the fundamental issue here is one of copyright. Wikipedia does not permit non-free images of living persons (or active bands) that merely show what they look like. We may only use freely-licensed photos to illustrate articles like this, and there are precious few of those available of Doc Hammer (and none of Weep...see commons:Category:Doc Hammer). We don't permit removal of images simply on the basis of "the subject doesn't like how they look in that photo"...the policy on photos of living persons is that they should not be used out of context to present a person in a false or disparaging light. The current image doesn't do that. Granted, it's not the most flattering image of Doc, and I really wish there were some freely-licensed images of Weep that could be used in the article, but there aren't, and a free image of the band's frontman is better than no image at all. In his Facebook post Doc suggests that fans simply pull photos off the band's Facebook or Myspace profiles and put those on Wikipedia. Please don't do this; it would violate Wikipedia's non-free content criteria (as these photos are, of course, copyrighted), and they would swiftly be deleted. Instead, if Mr. Hammer would like some more flattering photos of himself & his band to be used on Wikipedia, he is welcome to submit them and release them under a free license. Doc, if you're reading this, drop a note here and I'll be happy to help you or one of your representatives submit a few photos. I'd love to get one of the whole band performing that could be put in the infobox at the top of the article.

Alternatively, if any of you Doc Hammer fans out there have photos of him, or of Weep, that you took yourselves and that you think are better than the ones currently on Wikimedia Commons, please upload them under free licenses so they can be used here on Wikipedia! I'll even help you do it! Just let me know here and I'll get 'em uploaded to Commons. Wikipedia always welcomes new free images, but we have to be very careful of copyright violations. So please, only photos that you took yourself, or that you otherwise hold the copyright on. --IllaZilla (talk) 20:00, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

I appreciate your willingness to be helpful, truly, and while I do not own any images of Doc myself, I'm sure someone out there does, and hopefully can submit one or more to CC soon. But, I must say that I believe you are incorrect about the existing image. It is not an issue of copyright, or of how flattering the picture is or is not. As you can see from Doc's comments on the issue, it is not a problem of appearance but one of incorrect associations. The actual issue is that the image clearly has nothing to do with the band Weep and everything to do with Doc's work on The Venture Brothers. I would imagine that it may take some time to find a suitable image of the band to replace it, but in the meantime, my contention is that this completely unrelated image should certainly be removed. I completely disagree with your argument that it is "better than nothing" as it misrepresents the band's work by relating two aspects of Doc's career that are unrelated. The context communicates a false connection between VB and Weep, and I think you are reasonable enough to see why this could present a problem. 134.114.37.59 (talk) 21:54, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

I disagree that it's "completely unrelated". Doc Hammer is the frontman and songwriter of the band, and a well-known figure, and the band's notability derives in large part from his own. The article has several quotes from him, so a picture of him helps to illustrate the article even though it does not specifically depict him performing with Weep. Obviously I would prefer to have photos of him (& the rest of the band) performing, but I disagree that it "communicates a false connection between VB and Weep" or that it "misrepresents the band's work". There is no Venture Bros. imagery in the photo, and the caption doesn't mention VB at all; the photo is pretty much neutral as far as any association it creates. Yes, we (as fans) know it's a picture from Comic-Con, and that he was there for VB, but the picture itself doesn't imply that, and a general reader of an encyclopedia wouldn't be led to that conclusion by looking at the photo. For all intents and purposes, it could be him at any public appearance or interview. This one's even more neutral, but it's blurry (and one could argue that it's not directly Weep-pertinent either). The two things (Weep and VB) are not completely unrelated either; the band's Myspace includes streaming audio of the "SPHINX Theme" performed by Weep, Adult Swim ran a bump advertising Weep in front of a recent VB episode, the band's first EP was published by Astro-Base Go, and the band even performed at DragonCon (which Hammer was at to promote VB). Almost every review, biography, and interview cited makes note of Doc's work on The Venture Bros., so it doesn't make sense that noting this connection (which, again, the photo doesn't do), somehow "misrepresents the band's work". --IllaZilla (talk) 23:59, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

I would also like to note, merely for the benefit of those reading who may not be familiar with Wikipedia, that the article is currently fully protected from editing, which means that no one, myself included, is able to edit it in any way. I was not the one who protected it—only admins can do that, and I am not an admin—and it cannot be edited until an admin removes the protection status from the page. Again, I'm merely pointing this out so that there is no false impression created that the picture currently remains due to my own actions or opinion. The article has effectively been "locked in place" by an uninvolved admin in order to protect it from disruption and edit-warring while this discussion plays out. --IllaZilla (talk) 00:05, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Also, I know that there are folks reading this—and the editor at IP 134.114.37.59, who has been replying—who are in touch with Doc Hammer via Facebook. If you would be so kind, please let him know that we here at Wikipedia would very much like to get a couple of photos of him & his band uploaded here under a free license for use in the encyclopedia. It would be very preferrable to using photos that fans took of him at conventions, which are generally not of the best quality. If he would be kind enough to release a couple of photos from his collection under a license like {{GFDL-self}}, {{CC-BY-3.0}}, or {{CC-BY-SA-3.0}}, it would be very much appreciated. He can drop a note here or on my talk page, or even email me through Wikipedia. I would message him myself on Facebook, but I prefer to keep my real identity and my Wikipedia identity separate. I have been keeping up with the comments in the Facebook thread, and want to make it clear that I am not in any way attached to this specific picture. I simply would prefer that the article be illustrated rather than not, and I felt this one was the best of the very few free images of Doc that were available. I certainly didn't mean to ruffle Doc's feathers; as I said earlier, I'm a fan of his work or I wouldn't have written these articles in the first place (I hope to have my Weep CDs arrive in the mail any day now). --IllaZilla (talk) 01:23, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Exclamation of frustration! I'm glad that you think that contradicting me with irrelevant evidence is helpful. Of course some level of connection exists! Everyone realizes that Doc contributes music to the show, and you do not get brownie points. This information adds nothing to the discussion and does nothing to contradict my obvious point that representing the band effectively and honestly is FAR more preferable than representing the front man in an unrelated activity. The point that you keep reiterating is that there aren't enough photos out there to choose from under a free license. I completely f'ing agree with you, no contest! BUT, one major caveat to that agreement is that I am of the firm opinion that having this picture here instead of no picture at all for the span of time that it would take to find a more representative photograph is ridiculously unnecessary. This is so ridiculous, in fact, that I am absolutely done arguing about it. We obviously disagree about the necessity for this photograph's existence, but your failure to accept any level of compromise is becoming downright odd. I cannot discern any reasonable motive for your desire to keep this particular photograph besides the lack of other options. But, as you note, there ARE indeed other options! Not many, and (oh no!) possibly blurry ones, but options nonetheless. So, again, feel free to respond as you wish, but I won't be engaging with this any longer. Others can take up the case or not. Hopefully, the situation will simply be resolved by someone licensing a better photo. I just want you to realize that all we are arguing about is keeping up an abundantly unnecessary and unflattering photograph for the (hopefully) brief period of time between now and the time that a better photo is licensed. So, since I have apparently overestimated your reasonableness, do as you will, continue to lobby for a photograph that is not representative of the band in question. I'm sure everyone will be very pleased with your victory. I hope that my overwhelmingly passive-aggressive tone is coming across effectively in this format. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.121.184.21 (talk) 03:51, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry that our opinions result in an impasse. As you say, there are other options, but I feel they are inferior to this one (check the category at Commons and look at the resolution, lighting, etc. of those photos for yourself. For lack of a better word, they suck). And most importantly, there are currently no options that actually depict Weep, the band. The only current option for illustrating the article is to use one of the available photos of Doc. Like I said, I'd rather the article be illustrated than not, so I did the best I could with what I had to work with. Also, even if I agreed with you, I would be unable to remove the image currently as the article is fully protected (which, again, is not something that I did or even asked for). --IllaZilla (talk) 05:07, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Dochammer2010.jpg was recently uploaded to Commons and may serve as an acceptable substitute for the photo currently in the article. It's not as high-res as the current one, but it's in better focus than the other one I linked previously. I imagine some will still oppose it on the grounds that it's not directly Weep-related, and instead Venture Bros.-related (it's Doc at the Bowie panel at DragonCon 2010), but there is absolutely nothing in the photo that relates it to anything other than Doc himself (it's just him, in a regular shirt, seated behind a microphone in front of a blank background), so really it's neutral. I still prefer that the article be illustrated by at least one photo, and in the absence of a free image of the entire band I think that a neutral photo of the frontman/songwriter (who is quoted several times in the article text), placed outside the infobox, is an acceptable method of doing this. --IllaZilla (talk) 18:31, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from SarahjeanYjunerose, 2 December 2010

{{edit protected}} On the personal Doc Hammer Facebook page he has stated that there is a photo of him on the WEEP wiki page that is associated with the Venture Brother ( the animated series he is co-creator of and wishes that there is a picture of him with the Band Weep instead of a venture brothers one.

Doc Hammer as quoted on Facebook: MINIONS: I was just alerted to the WEEP Wikipedia entry. Why does that fucking picture of me squinting in a speed suit keep showing up? It's Venture, not WEEP related, and it's easily my least flattering picture. Can someone wiki savvy fix this and leave the humiliation of me...to me. I'm awesome at humiliating myself.

Link to a more fitting picture. [2] —Preceding unsigned comment added by SarahjeanYjunerose (talk • contribs) 06:39, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

See the conversation immediately above, #Images. Whether Hammer finds the picture flattering is not a valid reason to remove it, and we are not allowed to simply pull copyrighted images from the band's Facebook profile for use on Wikipedia (see WP:NFCC). Requests have been made above for Mr. Hammer, one of his representatives, or any of his fans to release one or more of their photos under a free license for use on Wikipedia. If a better, freely-licensed photo is provided, it can be used to replace the one currently in the article. We are not permitted to simply pull images from other websites. --IllaZilla (talk) 06:44, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Trademark

The trademark for the band WEEP is owned by Robin Lynn Winkelmann and Kimberly J Paschke. Thus the other band using this name is infringing on the tradermark. Trademark owned by Robin Lynn Winkelmann and Kimberly Paschke — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kpaschke (talk • contribs) 14:51, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

That's a legal issue that they would need to pursue, this is not the place. This is an encyclopedia, based on published sources, so this is wholly irrelevant. Greg Fasolino (talk) 18:55, 1 June 2017 (UTC)