This article will address the topic of
Wikipedia:Files for deletion/Replaceable fair use/File:Dp-pae-001.jpg, which has been the subject of great interest and debate in recent decades.
Wikipedia:Files for deletion/Replaceable fair use/File:Dp-pae-001.jpg has captured the attention of academics, professionals and the general public due to its impact on various aspects of contemporary society. Throughout this article,
Wikipedia:Files for deletion/Replaceable fair use/File:Dp-pae-001.jpg will be analyzed in depth, exploring its origin, evolution, implications and possible future scenarios. Different perspectives, theories and studies will be examined that will shed light on this phenomenon, allowing the reader to obtain a comprehensive and critical understanding of
Wikipedia:Files for deletion/Replaceable fair use/File:Dp-pae-001.jpg. Through the detailed examination of this topic, we seek to promote reflection and dialogue around
Wikipedia:Files for deletion/Replaceable fair use/File:Dp-pae-001.jpg, contributing to understanding and generating new ideas and approaches to address the challenges it presents.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of a fair use image as a replaceable image. Please do not modify it.
The result was to delete the image.
Shyam (T/C) 09:42, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Royals are not available for photography by commoners, thats why they release a yearly press image
- I don't believe that she never allows herself to be photographed outside of official portraits. If you can provide a source for that, I'll eat crow and declare the image non-replaceable. Otherwise, I don't see why a visitor couldn't photograph her and release the photo under a free license. – Quadell (talk) (random) 21:06, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.