Talk:Gilles (novel)

Novels Low‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

France Low‑importance

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

tikhanovlibrary (TL) should not be added

The "translator" has admitted to using DeepL to translate Gilles repeatedly on 4chan's /lit/. See https://warosu.org/lit/thread/22592323#p22594764; https://warosu.org/lit/thread/22226816#p22233662; and an active thread on the website https://warosu.org/lit/thread/23771278#p23774765. Furthermore, TL does not own the rights to translate Gilles as the work is not in the public domain, therefore permission from Gallimard (at the least) is required. To publicize TL's "translation" is illegitimate. I suspect TL keeps advertising his own website. Rhizombie (talk) 17:39, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, Rhizombie, that's not how any of this works. You can't drop in a bunch of forum posts where Anonymous says "Yeah, you’re retarded and shit sucks", and whether or not a publisher has the rights to translate it is not our problem. Drmies (talk) 17:55, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're being disingenuous. Read the threads. Just because you simply struggle to follow a conversation does not mean it is not there. Rhizombie (talk) 18:11, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, since you are being disingenuous and most likely obtuse as you are too cowardly to read the actual threads, how do you explain that Pierre Drieu La Rochelle's Next of Kin (his brother) filed for copyright renewal in 1967 (https://exhibits.stanford.edu/copyrightrenewals/catalog/R418135)

Gilles
Author:

DRIEU LA ROCHELLE, PIERRE

Renewal ID:

R418135

Original Registration Number:

AF45851

Date of Renewal:

15Sep67

Date of Publication:

30Dec39

Claimant:

Jean Drieu la Rochelle (NK)

Class Code:

NK

which, according to copyright law, is still legally protected and Gallimard claims to now have the copyright (https://r.cantook.com/eden/sample/aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZWRlbmxpdnJlcy5mci9zYW1wbGUvMjgzMDA5L3dlYl9yZWFkZXJfbWFuaWZlc3Q_Zm9ybWF0X25hdHVyZT1lcHViJnNpZ2lkPTE2ODc5MjM2OTImc2lnbmF0dXJlPTQ2Y2U0YTc5ZWZkOTdjZDBkMDYwYWIwOTAwMmMzMjA2ZWVhN2JiNDY1YmU1YzAzMjY3Y2NjMzJhNWQwYmEzYzk). Notwithstanding your refusal to actually read, explain how TL is publishing a translation for which he does not have the legal right to? Rhizombie (talk) 19:22, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The book is still being published, even if it's an illegal translation. Feel free to add that fact to the article if you can find a reliable source (not 4chan which is disallowed as a fully self-published source) clearly defending the illegal translation as a citation. Just be sure to follow our policies on original research WP:NOR (i.e. don't make readers decipher the source; only a clear-cut "this translation violated copyright laws" or similar). Also, please avoid using personal attacks when defending your point. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 19:34, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rhizombie, really none of the things you say matter here. Whether some publisher falls foul of copyright law or not is not our business. The publisher is publishing the book, and that's probably valid information for an encyclopedic article. Your whole "read the thread" means nothing: it's 4chan where Anonymous is arguing with Anonymous, and none of that has any validity here. You want to claim I can't follow a conversation--sure, but even saying that really confirms that you do not understand what Wikipedia is and what we are doing here. Drmies (talk) 23:19, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]