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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics 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.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 August 2020 and 14 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Benji2498.
The first paragraph contains: “Examples for works not covered by copyright which are therefore in the public domain, … and all software before 1974”.
This may well have been true in the US but is not true of other countries such as the UK and Italy where, from what I understand, copyright law has covered software for all of the time software has existed. While it wasn't actually tested in case law until later than 1974 (in the 1980s) software was covered, just nobody knew it was for sure. Perhaps somebody more knowledgeable about this history of this could review and tweak this point. EdDavies (talk) 22:14, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
TJRC reverted an edit of mine on this page (mentioning French copyright extensions for authors who "died for France") with the mention: Interesting, if true. Would be okay to add with an actual reference (the text in the <ref> tag is not a reference)).
When editing the page, I thought that the link contained in the phrase some authors who "[[Mort pour la France|died for France]]" during wartime was enough, as it was the obvious place where the appropriate references should be found — and are: four of them in the article in English, and even more in the corresponding article in French, which is of course the authoritative Wikipedia article for something concerning France. TJRC, if you really want it, I can copy all these references from both the English and the French articles and paste them into the text you reverted; but I still believe that it would be needless duplication. — Tonymec (talk) 09:19, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
In general, an editor should support the statements they add to an article. Some are common-sense, and don't really need support -- see WP:BLUE -- but in general, passages like the above ought to be supported by a citation identifying the reference relied on by the editor.
It's not reasonable to expecting a reader to have to go off into a linked article to find that support. Articles are edited and read independently of one another. A reader interested in copyright law, for example, is not likely to go looking for information on copyright in an article about dying for a country, for example. What's more, if an editor makes such an edit, relying on a reader to go looking elsewhere for that reference, there's no guarantee that the reference will still be in that other article anyway. Articles are edited independently by a lot of editors, there's no telling whether the reference relied on will still be in that article a year, or five year, later.
Now, whether you should "copy all these references from both the English and the French articles and paste them into the text"; let's break that down.
"Copy": You should cite the reference that you relied on in making the edit. Each editor is responsible for the edits they make. If an editor is making an edit to this article, based on something they learn from the content of another article, they should check the reference to confirm that it supports the statement they are making, and then cite to that reference (or another reference, if they are researching independently. However, they should not just copy over a reference blindly, without regard for confirmation that the reference says what its is represented as saying; otherwise you're basically just relying on Wikipedia content itself, and we know that Wikipedia itself is not a reliable source. Copying the wikitext may be the easiest way to port that reference over, but remember that that's just a convenient way of making your edit; it's still your edit.
So: you can use a reference you find in another article and use it as a reference in this article; but you have the obligation to ensure that it really is a reference for the proposition you're citing it for, rather than relying on whatever editor made that other edit in the other article.
"....all these references from both the English and the French articles": generally, you only need to provide references to the extent necessary to support the statements you're adding. If one reliable source does the job, that's all you need, even if the other article used several. And keep in mind that, all things being equal, in English Wikipedia, an English language reference would be preferred to a non-English one. TJRC (talk) 23:24, September 22, 2020 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 16 March 2021
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Elli (talk | contribs) 01:32, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Diamond Sutra page says it is the first creative work with an explicit public domain dedication. Wqwt (talk) 09:28, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
tyu ret gyr — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 04:49, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Public Domain content should not be allowed on Commons...
Something that is Public Domain in the US may be copyrighted abroad... Public Domain vs CC0, CC0 has a fallback license PD does not Slinkyw (talk) 01:47, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
@Slinkyw: An interesting suggestion, but this is not the place to discuss it. This is the place to discuss editing the Wikipedia article about public domain. To suggest changes to what Wikimedia accepts, you'll probably do best to start at Commons:Village pump. --Nat Gertler (talk) 02:21, 11 July 2021 (UTC)