Talk:Doomsday Clock

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Clock images to table[edit]

I've uploaded to commons the clock images and added them to the table. I am not sure if it is an improvement or necessary. Please feel free to revert. If you do, consider adding one to the top right of the article as either an identifier or indicator of current status.

As for the copyright status, I uploaded them in good faith as {{PD-ineligible}} per guidance at IRC from a commons admin.

See also: Talk:Doomsday Clock/Archive 1#Image (above)

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:16, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

I couldn't resist adding a lead image with current time and the 2016 entry to the bottom of the table. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:27, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

I said revert if you like, but now I think it is an improvement. It helps the visitor really see the movement toward and away from that time when we kiss our loved ones and stop worrying about the dishes in the sink. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:38, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Copyright justification for use of images?[edit]

I noticed the clock image was out of date, and went to check the licence so I could upload a new one. I found that Anna Frodesiak has uploaded the images (and Danothy has now uploaded the most recent one) with justification "This image is ineligible for copyright and therefore is in the public domain, because it consists entirely of information that is common property and contains no original authorship."

Is this justified? There have been artistic decisions taken in the design of this clock, e.g. how to crop it, relative size of elements - I don't see why it wouldn't be copyrightable. I suspect if we contacted the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists they might well be willing to GFDL them; or we could make our own. TSP (talk) 16:23, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

In fact, if you look on the Bulletin's website, they've copyrighted the phrase "It is two and a half minutes to midnight." I don't know if the copyright notice on that text extends to the Clock itself, but it may. I've sent an email to the Bulletin to determine this, and will report back with a response if/when I get one. MereTechnicality (talk) 14:40, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
IMPORTANT UPDATE: The Bulletin has responded and said that the Clock should not be used without their permission under any circumstance. I asked for permission to use it on Wikipedia and have not received a response. The image may need to be replaced. I will let everyone know when/if the Bulletin responds to my request. MereTechnicality (talk) 17:14, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
@MereTechnicality: They will need to fill out this form and email their consent to OTRS. - Mlpearc (open channel) 17:50, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
@Mlpearc: I've sent them the form. MereTechnicality (talk) 17:54, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
The person I've had contact with says they think they've already signed that. Can someone check the older images to see if it is? MereTechnicality (talk) 01:12, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Before I uploaded those clock images, I sought counsel from commons people. I was assured that the images were easily PD per Commons policy on Threshold of originality. I uploaded them in good faith considering that there is nothing new in the design, and that it is just a generic clock face just like people have been making for a hundred years. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:56, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Anna - I hadn't seen that page. It looks like the law is more flexible than I thought, and it's probably right that these don't meet the threshold of originality in the US. (There still might be something to be said in the long-term for creating our own so they are in a consistent format, as the provided ones now aren't). TSP (talk) 16:07, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
TSP, I must say that the counsel was at IRC. I will ask if it can be published here. I didn't think it worth a post to find out and mentioned it at IRC. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:45, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Opinions from Commons to help settle this

At The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, they state: "....Copyright © 2017 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use..." When I click on "Terms of Use", it bounces back to The bottom line here may be that, even though they claim ownership of that clock image, it may be made of such simple shapes that they cannot actually have ownership. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:09, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Disbelief or denial[edit]

The article reads: "and the disbelief in the scientific consensus over climate change by the Trump Administration". The panel's actual quote: "the expressed disbelief". They also mention the refusal to obtain and acknowledge the advice of qualified experts in their respective fields. I would perhaps suggest to include "expressed" in the sentence, and/or to add a second sentence describing the situation, although if none of the sources call it "denial", we should probably, like them, describe the situation in their own words and let the reader evaluate... (talk) 16:21, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Please change "disbelief" to "the expressed disbelief" as per source. (talk) 02:09, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Done DRAGON BOOSTER 05:29, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
Great thanks (talk) 01:07, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 January 2017[edit]

In the "timeline" table, the "Change" column would be improved by using the more prominent minus sign "−" rather than a hyphen "-". Please change all negative numbers in that table from "-" to "−". (talk) 18:17, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Done Linguisttalk|contribs 18:37, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
@Linguist111: Thank you! (talk) 21:45, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
No problem! Face-smile.svg Linguisttalk|contribs 22:04, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Pop Culture[edit]

Since there is a pop culture section, why not link to Iron Maiden's song 2 Minutes to Midnight as it references the clock? Regards, (talk) 06:06, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Done Linguisttalk|contribs 06:29, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

there is no physical doomsday clock, it's just a design[edit]

This article currently says "... the Clock, which hangs on a wall in The Bulletin's office in the University of Chicago,[2] ... ". The cited reference shows a photo of the clock behind the Bulletin editor, circa 2006.

I wanted to visit the clock based on this article. However, a FAQ [1] on The Bulletin's website, published on 26 JANUARY 2017, says
Where can I visit the Doomsday Clock? There is no physical Doomsday Clock.

Out of an abundance of caution, I hesitate to update this page until I get some coaching on how to proceed. Do I edit the text, the reference, the photo which shows a clock?

Alternatively we could launch a kickstarter to build a physical doomsday clock. Quick, we haven't much time! Please advice.

--Bobnewstadt (talk) 16:41, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

There are many Doomsday Clocks and have been for years. I published a design myself for an Arduino-based physical computing one that updated itself according to The Bulletin's own website.
However there is no single canonical Doomsday Clock. "The Doomsday Time" is defined virtually (and can be replicated to other clocks), rather than read from some "Prime Clock". Andy Dingley (talk) 17:25, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Having received little guidance in the past 10 days I updated the page to note that visits to the clock in the real world are not possible.

Bobnewstadt (talk) 20:40, 4 May 2017 (UTC)


External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Doomsday Clock. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:48, 12 September 2017 (UTC)