Template:Did you know nominations/My Master (book)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The following discussion 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 PumpkinSky talk 22:37, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

My Master (book)[edit]

Swami Vivekananda

Moved to mainspace by Titodutta (talk). Self nominated at 03:57, 22 June 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article new enough, long enough (although could use some critical/thematic analysis), and adequately cited. Hook short enough, interesting enough, and also cited. Article appears to be neutral and free of copyright violations and plagiarism. Cheers!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:31, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg The article is all plot; it should include at least some of the content outlined by Dr. B above. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:10, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Quickly Fixed. Hope you have not removed it from queue. --TitoDutta 02:46, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg A little bit more, at least 1k characters would be good. Make it appear to be more complete (per DYKSG D7) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:51, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Added one more section "Background" --TitoDutta 03:37, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Relation to the collection unclear. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:58, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Connection established. During his second visit to the West Vivekananda delivered a series of lectures. The two lectures in question (i.e. the book) were given in this period. Added an image. --TitoDutta 04:11, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Image related discussion

  • Symbol question.svg Article is fine, but image has no proof of publication (and therefore no way to know if it's PD). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:15, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
  • A reporter Miss Partington from San Francisco Chronicle newspaper took an interview of Vivekananda in 1900. Partington went to Vivekananda and asked for photographs to publish with the article. At this time 7 images of Vivekananda were taken. The images were taken in at Bushnell Studio, San Francisco. Photographer was Frederick Bushnell. Vivekananda handed over these 7 images to his American disciples, one of them was Mrs. Hansbrough. --TitoDutta 04:32, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
  • And proof of publication? US law generally does not consider when works were produced, but when they were published. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:34, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
  • I can not find online sources in support. But, see this and also see this which mentions— A move was made and seconded that Miss Ansell, Mr. French, and Mr. Juhl be appointed a committee of three to inquire regarding copyright of photographs. Carried. Moved and seconded that Mr. French apply for copyright for Swami Vivekananda's photos--7 sittings. However, a copyright was never acquired by the Society. --TitoDutta 04:48, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Alright, that's a bit better, but that would not be PD-1923. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:55, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Suggest the license. I may need to make changes in multiple images. But, IMO, PD-1923 is fine too-- the images were used in advertisements (first link above and offline source) --TitoDutta 05:04, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
  • The link only refers to advertisements using "the nasty standing photos of 1893" (the ones where he's wearing the light brown shirt and of which we have a signed copy, if I'm not reading that incorrectly). I can't think of the right template. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:48, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Not a single template is matching. There is PD-US-no notice for works published without copyright restrictions between 1923 and 1978. Do not know what to do if the image was published before 1934. "Publication year" is a dubious requirement — which I have said already in other discussions— I can challenge a good number of good/featured images and tag those as lacking publication year data. Generally, no one remembers publication year, but, the year of taking an image is remembered. Vivekananda's all original works are in public domain. --TitoDutta 08:47, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Perhaps nobody remembers the year of publication, but US copyright law requires us to look for it (unless it's like 200 years old, in which case it's PD-100). When did the photographer die? That could be an alternative. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:53, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
  • I have checked that too. 1931. +100 will not work. TitoDutta 09:25, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Okay, we've got PD-80 which is good for most of the world (but not the US, where it counts most). Anything to show publication? Even heresay? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:26, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Ya, the sources above indicate Vivekananda gave the image to American disciples, I have shown above— a group of American and European disciples (from Vedanta society) possess a copy of the image in 1903. So, it shows the image was already "public" in 1903. --TitoDutta 20:08, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Printing ten or so copies (for example) for friends or followers is not "publication" under US copyright law. Generally a wider dissemination is necessary. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:41, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
  • I am unable to find more details. Merge-arrow.svg An editor feels this/this part of discussion is a WikiProject India related topic and is requesting to either consider moving this discussion to Flag of India.svg WikiProject India Noticeboard or inform the noticeboard about it. Please see this essay for details. TitoDutta 23:54, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── The easiest way to run this would be to not use the picture. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:43, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

  • That will be like covering a wound and not healing it. The images will be present in Commons. ALMOST NONE of the PD images we have in Commons show sourced publication details. But, that is an OSE argument. I am inclined to think since Vivekananda "public"-ly distributed few copies of the image, PD-1923 is applicable. I saw a discussion at Commons where one person posted his photo to his friends and the image was considered PD. --TitoDutta 01:22, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
  • That might be enough for Commons... can you at the very least make this clear on the image page? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:46, 2 July 2013 (UTC)