Commons:Deletion requests/File:Homophobia.jpg

I'm not familiar with commons policy, but this image is a statement of hate against homosexuals. It features the gay pride flag splattered with something, which could be paint, mud, or blood. Either way it's rather inflammatory, and has caused a stir at Wikipedia. Equazcion (talk) 23:38, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Nor am I familiar with Commons etiquette, but if this is anything like wp-en's XFD, a sound delete would be in order. No encyclopaedic use, at any rate. (Apologies in advance if I have done something frightful by commenting here or invoking encyclopeadias) Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 23:44, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
•  Delete - In addition to being inflammatory (which is not in itself grounds for deletion), the image does not seem to be any sort of official (or even unofficial) symbol for anything, nor is it recognized as anything. It would have zero use on any projects, thus it falls outside the scope of Commons. The Wordsmith (talk) 05:43, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
•  Comment Is it in use? (The usage checking tool is down right now.) /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 08:41, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • It was used on a userbox on a user page on English Wikipedia; the userbox read "This user is homophobic". The userbox was placed by the user himself, and was removed from the user page (along with other questionable content) by the user when his user page was nominated for deletion. The issue was raised at the incidents noticeboard (WP:AN/I) where one editor commented that a spray of what might be blood over the rainbow flag being displayed by a user who self-describes as homophobic can be taken as threatening towards GLBTI editors. I don't know if the image is used anywhere else. I know nothing about commons policy, but I hope this unnecessary and offensive image will be deleted ASAP. 10:28, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
    • I don't care for that image, but is it that different than File:Anty_LGBT.png or all the other files in Category:Anti logos? --Túrelio (talk) 21:11, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Those images are just symbols with X's or red circles over them. This seems like a more personal defacing; akin to, say, a picture of a mud-splattered flag of a country. To depict a symbol with something splattered on it seems like spitting on someone's culture, rather than simply voicing your disagreement or disapproval with it. Equazcion (talk) 21:22, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
•  Keep In use on the Hebrew Wikipedia. These sort of images are useful. The Commons is not censored: we should only remove supposed hate images if their only use is vandalism or attack. --Simonxag (talk) 11:05, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looks like it's only used on talk pages, aside from this one page: entitled "Homophobia in Israel". My hebrew isn't good enough to determine whether the picture is provided merely as decoration or if it is an actual used symbol. I would contend that offensive or not, it should only be kept around if it is an actual known symbol, rather than to say merely that "There are those who are homophobic. Here's something they might do." Equazcion (talk) 16:14, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's clearly not being used as an attack or hate image on that page. --Simonxag (talk) 00:49, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you mean. If you mean vandalism, I guess it's probably not being used for that, or someone would probably have removed it. But if it serves a legitimate purpose in the article, the question then is (I think) whether or not the image is actually a commonly used anti-homosexual symbol, or if someone made it up as an example of what such a symbol might look like. I'm basing this largely off of Wordsmith's comment above. Equazcion (talk) 01:04, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not up to us to decide or limit what the editors of various wikis will choose. A commonly used symbol, a person or a new composite symbol, all of these have been used to illustrate abstractions on the English Wikipedia. --Simonxag (talk) 10:58, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not so sure about the "new composite symbol". Those would be removed as original research, I think. Equazcion (talk) 15:31, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• It's not actually used in a "userbox" on the english wikipedia. Its used in pseudo userboxes ginned up w/ wikicode (the formed being subject to a local deletion discussion, the latter not). I would say delete it if were on en.wiki, but I don't know the norms here. Protonk (talk) 00:40, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
•  Keep The caption on the Hebrew Wikipedia reads something like "After the shooting incident in Tel Aviv LGBT Society, Many changed their profile picture social network - Facebook pictures as part of a protest against homophobia.", if an image like this was indeed used then that constitutes an education purpose to the file. --Paul Carpenter (talk) 12:47, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded the picture. it was created an a protestation simbol after the 2009 Tel Aviv gay centre shooting and its been used in hebrow wiki on homophobia in israel, as an example for online protestation (many Facebook users in Israel changed their profile picture to this short after the event, alongside this one). similar pictures was on the cover of the local newspapers. אנדר-ויק (talk) 13:24, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing this image anywhere else on the internet. I just see the flag with either a black stripe, or with the flag's red stripe "dripping" down slightly into the others. Could you link to an actual use of this image? Equazcion (talk) 23:46, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

as i say, this image was used as a profile picture of many Israeli Facebook users. you can't fine Facebook profile pictures on Google-images. look Here, and here. אנדר-ויק (talk) 18:25, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I understand what you're saying, but even a facebook image should show up eventually somewhere else on the internet, if this was such a big event. I would think, anyway. Equazcion (talk) 06:15, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All I see when I look at this symbol is the Pride Flag splattered with blood. The message I feel it sends is one of violence and threat towards LGBTI people. The user whose userbox used it on English Wikipedia used it as a symbol of homophobia. If it is intended as a tribute to those hurt and killed in the Tel Aviv incident then I think it is highly ambiguous and poorly chosen - the pride flag with the black "arm-band" shown on this en:wiki page is much clearer in its message. Would not the black ribbon image serve the same purpose on Hebrew Wikipedia, and also allow this symbol which some (including me) find offensive and / or threatening to be removed? 15:20, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree, and I actually suspect this image is not the one that was used on facebook. The black stripe seems much more appropriate, and can actually be found on the internet, as opposed to this one. Equazcion (talk) 20:56, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can use a cross as a dead-symbol or a christian life symbol. Others: Category:Pietà and Saint Sebastian. You can make a shirt with blood as a symbol to shoot someone or a symbol against war. Rainbow with cross and Jesus You can use a fist for or against violence or for power.

• Brand campaign against homophobia, Brasilia. Title: "NO HOMOPHOBIA IDENTITY": Rainbow with blood; Cannes Lions 2009 Design Bronze 2009: Winner of Bronze. Online at https://www.naohomofobia.com.br/ (Flag on the left side.)
• Blog with Bloody Rainbow against Homophobia [1], 2009-09-29 [2]
• Bloody Jamaica against Homophobia [3]

It is like "Homophobia is so gay". Or the en:Pink triangle. (the "now turned upright" is not common, at least not in europe) Or punched faces against Homophobia [4] This flag in in speacial, i have not seen und the facebook link is death. --Fg68at de:Disk 07:14, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@ original del requ: Commons is not cencored! We don't delete images because they do offend people. If some people see an image of the nazi swastika (e.g. Nazi Swastika.svg) they are offended because of similar or different things but we don't delete all nazi swastikas just because of the fact that some person or a group is offended. However, I'm not sure if this image does really add something aducational to our current file stock so it's maybe out of scope... ADD: The file is used so it does not matter if somebody is offended or if somebody thinks that this image is outside of commons scope. The usage in a project makes it in scope. (22:15, 15 March 2010 (UTC)) --D-Kuru (talk) 22:12, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kept, in use and Commons is not censored. --The Evil IP address (talk) 14:05, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]