File talk:Backboard shattering.jpeg

Tag

@Iruka13: Hello, can you please explain the reasoning behind the tag? It cites point #1 which claims no free alternatives are available, but I searched and couldn’t find any free images. Can you indicate where there are free alternatives available? I'd like to work to resolve the issue, thank you. Left guide (talk) 09:35, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello. It say: "no free alternatives are available, or could be created". What's stopping you from taking a similar photo or making a similar image in a 3D editor? — Ирука¹³ 09:46, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

@Iruka13: Well the backboard shattering is a very rare unplanned occurrence in sport, so it can't be staged. And as for making an image in a 3D editor, I don't have the time or knowledge to do that, and it probably wouldn't be an appropriate means of illustrating the concept. Hence, it is extraordinarily difficult if not impossible to produce a free alternative. Left guide (talk) 09:52, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Backboards are not shatterable on demand, even if budget wasn't an issue. And I'm not aware of a new trend to deny WP:NFCC #1 by using generated images in lieu of the real world. —Bagumba (talk) 16:34, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Why not? — Ирука¹³ 22:52, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

As you said it "could be created", you should be the one explaining how it can be reasonably done. No? —Bagumba (talk) 01:59, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

No-no, I definitely explain when necessary. I'm curious about why you think neither your first nor your second assumption is feasible, despite both being used on WP. — Ирука¹³ 02:08, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

I think backboards are more or less shatterproof now, so I believe it requires skilled demolition techniques to recreate. As for 3D/AI images, I said "I'm not aware" of their use on WP, so feel free to provide past examples of NFCC being denied on those grounds (It just seems we'd rarely need NFCC then if we're content with "fake" image replacement). —Bagumba (talk) 02:24, 17 November 2024 (UTC)