Talk:Public Domain Day

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Public Domain Day article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article was nominated for deletion on 26 December 2011. The result of the discussion was keep.

A fact from Public Domain Day appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 1 January 2012 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Public Domain Day is celebrated on January 1 in several countries, but not in the United States or Australia, where no works will enter the public domain until 2019 and 2026 respectively?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2012/January. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Public Domain Day.

Wikipedia

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on January 1, 2021, January 1, 2022, January 1, 2023, January 1, 2024, and January 1, 2025.

Holidays Low‑importance

	Holidays portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Holidays, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of holidays 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.HolidaysWikipedia:WikiProject HolidaysTemplate:WikiProject HolidaysHolidays
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Open (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Open, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.OpenWikipedia:WikiProject OpenTemplate:WikiProject OpenOpen

Problems

The list of creators whose work is entering PD has several problems. First, it's an arbitrary selection. Second, it's Eurocentric; for the majority of the world's population, the examples are incorrect. Third, to be useful it would have to be maintained every year; for an orphan article about a made-up holiday, I don't have much faith in that happening. The list of this year's events (some of which don't even take place on the designated day) will also become quickly out of date. In fact, one of the events cited actually happened a year ago, and apparently isn't happening again this January... which demonstrates that this is not an established holiday or annual event; it's something that some people would like to be celebrated. On top of that, the article has other problems. The "Public domain" section is just a rehash of info about PD, and some of the content has an obvious argumentative angle to it (e.g. "Many more works would be entering the public domain...") I'm supportive of the ideals behind the PD, but this article is WP:ADVOCACY and only a few steps beyond WP:MADEUP. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 12:47, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitrary selection - I'd say it's the least of most famous, but I understand your point. I have never liked terrible and arbitrary lists like List of Poles. I'd hope that the list would be expanded into a full and complete list of authors, but I'd prefer few examples to nothing. Ditto, I think it would be useful to record when and where celebrations are taking place. The article, IMHO, seems to cover a notable event, but feel free to rework it to be less of an advocacy. Sadly, people promoting this event have done a rather poor job releasing materials on it; I was barely able to destub it. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 17:55, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A "full and complete list of authors" would be utterly impossible, and even if you could find them Wikipedia is not a guide to PD Day parties. If you can't find evidence that people are consistently observing this, how is it notable? -Jason A. Quest (talk) 12:49, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Earliest mention

As far as I can find, the earliest mention is on Lessig's blog from 2004: [1]. But if anybody can show an even older mention, please do. This really needs an improved history of section. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 14:17, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I'm coming up with as well. It actually isn't Lessig but Wallace McLean who used the term, Lessig just quoted McLean's post from a mailing list. McLean also runs a website where he posts on PD issues, and has been known to make up holidays like "Happy BloomsMonth", so it wouldn't be surprised it started with him in 2004 and caught on with others informally, perhaps fueled by Lessig and others. I'll email McLean and see what he knows. Green Cardamom (talk) 15:33, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Also, I wonder if Wallace McLean is notable? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 23:21, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

McLean hasn't responded (yet?). He does appear to be the originator. Notable for starting PD day for the purpose of the article, we can mention his name along with Lessig's blog to make sure.

-- Green Cardamom (talk) 16:00, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Doing some Google searching.. info on Wallace J. McLean, he consulted the Canadian Govt on copyright law issues.[2]. He appears to be a Canadian public domain activist/businessman and/or lawyer who coined the idea of "PD Day" in 2004, and for a few years sent out his annual list of works entering the PD in Canada. The idea has since caught on. Green Cardamom (talk) 16:18, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This page seems deceptive

This topic seems to be written to deceive. Please delete it. JudgeMistry (talk) 19:22, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks fine by WP:NPOV (not deceptive) and is well-cited (not deletable, even if "deceptive" were a valid deletion rationale). Please provide specific details of your concerns. DMacks (talk) 19:28, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In my 32 years of legal practice Dealing also with many IP and Copyright matters Ive never heard of this day being celebrated widely. Which UN or other International agency has declared it to be so ? There doesnt appear to be such a day in China India indonesia Pakistan Brazil Nigeria etc.having maybe 50% of global population. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JudgeMistry (talk • contribs) 20:04, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are multiple cites from reliable writers attesting to this at least as an informal name. It need not be a UN-declared event, and it need not be noticed by half the world for it to meet the WP:GNG threshold to merit an article. I'm never too old to learn new things either...that's why I read Wikipedia. And that's also why WP:V is a policy, where cited refs let experts and non-experts alike find out why anything is written here. DMacks (talk) 20:07, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry to disabuse you. International days are decided by governments, diplomats, lawyers and NGOs before they get listed on the UN portal list of international days and weeks. Such days are not decided by Wikepdia putting 20 youth in a room in Indonesia playacting celebrations like this topics misleading video of 2020. This has been pointed out earlier here as MADEUP and ADVOCACY, which it is. Out of the Worlds top 10 nations by population only the USA has A bit of support for this “day”. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JudgeMistry (talk • contribs) 20:40, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter if nobody except a few people in the US celebrates it. But the article states (with cites) that it is marked in multiple other countries as well. That's how WP:V works. It is not stated to be a formal international holiday, so your concern is off-base about this article existing. Maybe you are concerned that this article is linked from a certain portal? In that case, you should take it up with that portal. There is zero mention anywhere here on this article's talkpage about MAKEUP or ADVOCACY, further suggesting you are in the wrong place. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Public Domain Day strongly refuted the claims of being a made-up/advocacy thing. That's how WP:CONSENSUS works--I don't have to like it or agree obviously, but I have to respect it or start a new formal discussion to overturn it (no sense wasting time and typing doing anything else, as it would be futile). If you wish this article to be deleted, you must follow the WP:AFD process. DMacks (talk) 21:01, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The singular fact that you conceded that only a few people in USA celebrate it, establishes it to be deceptive, misleading with intent to cheat. If an NGO collected donations in my jurisdiction based solely on this article they would be booked for cheating. You should take down this page, The words Advoccacy and Madeup are in the first message posted on this talk board. This page has 3 tags describing it as a LAW article. If what you say is true, they are equally deceptive.

I did later see them, which is why in a later edit I pointed to the AFD (dated after that top talkpage comment) that did not find sufficient merit to those concerns (though I should have removed my initially flawed comment about it). File AFD. You will not achive your goal of having this article deleted in any other way. I won't bother replying any further, as there is nothing I can say that will alter the fact that AFD is the way articles get deleted and AFD is the current reason the article exists. DMacks (talk) 21:42, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As this is stated to be a law article it has to comply with international law. This article is clearly not any kind of law article, its contents intentionally convey misleading information such as I have described that is patently false and untrue.if Wikimedia is collecting donations in places like Indonesia by such deceptions it is a serious matter. I am new here so cant do this AFD, so please point me to your grievance officer so i can convey the offences self evident in the article and the earlier AFD you provided. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JudgeMistry (talk • contribs) 22:15, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]