Template talk:PD-ineligible

Template:PD-ineligible is permanently protected from editing because it is a heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes or categories.

Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. This template does not have a testcases subpage. You can create the testcases subpage here.

Comments

This template needs to be used with care--more care, I think, than is currently being used. If you create images or sound files yourself, do not use this tag, use PD-self. NTK 18:59, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The purpose of this template is to designate those images that are not sufficiently original etc. to be protected by copyright. If someone creates an image that meets these criteria, they cannot release it into the public domain, because the image has never been under copyright: only original creations are. I've tagged a few images with this template, including: text presented as an image (e.g. simple chemical structural formulas for which the current Mediawiki software doesn't have specialized markup), certain examples of musical notation where the sole purpose of the image is to illustrate that notation (e.g. images of key signatures in music, since there is no creativity involved: there's only one commonly used way to write the key signature for, say, E sharp major), certain signs (e.g. traffic signs; but not trademarks/logos). I fully agree that this template should be used at most sparingly. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 02:53, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The problem I see is that the judgment of "originality" is a subjective one that is ultimately decided by courts, which in a given case may swing one way or the other. Even a visibily trivial and unoriginal image might, by some court, be judged to be an original and creative arrangement of binary bits--courts and lawyers do not always think way laymen, artists, and other professionals do even when common sense seems to be involved. PD-self is safer, because you are relinquishing any possible copyright claim you might hold on the file whether it is truly "original" enough to be copyrighted or not. NTK 19:17, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, I was thinking of things like the scales and such here. There is obviously only one way to write a key signature, right? Just like there's only one alphabet. But people copyright fonts all the time, or try to, and make businesses out of licensing them. So someone might argue that their particular key-signature image is in some sense original. It probably isn't original enough, and we could probably upload it under PD-ineligible, but better yet, if you are the one making it, better to say explicitly that you have no such claim. NTK 19:20, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Typefaces cannot be copyrighted in the US: Copyright#Typefaces, Typeface#Intellectual property. I always use this tag for images that are just text with no special colors or designs. If there's a trademark, you can also use {{Trademark}}. nadav 08:41, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interwiki request

Please add interwiki link for Serbian language Wikipedia. The link is:

[[sr:Шаблон:Јв-Не подлеже заштити]]

Thank you. --Branislav Jovanovic 09:26, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done -- Netsnipe ► 08:58, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

{{editprotected}} Please add [[de:Vorlage:Bild-PD-Schöpfungshöhe]]. TZM^T (de:^T) 15:56, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Plz, add de-wiki. :-) Alex Spade 10:26, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Plz, add also ru-wiki: [[ru:Шаблон:PD-trivial]] Alex Spade 10:26, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride 15:50, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{editprotected}} Please add mk:Шаблон:Јд-Не подложи на заштита interwiki. Thanks. --iNkubusse^? 17:55, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done --CapitalR (talk) 18:02, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{editprotected}} Add interwiki of other wikipedias:
ar:قالب:ملكية عامة - غير مؤهل
da:Skabelon:PD-uegnet (redirect:da:Skabelon:PD-ineligible)
eo:Ŝablono:PD-ineligible
fr:Modèle:Domaine public inéligible (redirect:fr:Modèle:PD-ineligible)
ka:თარგი:PD-ineligible
lt:Šablonas:PD-ineligible
nl:Sjabloon:PD-ineligible
ja:Template:PD-ineligible
pl:Szablon:PD-ineligible
sk:Šablóna:PD-ineligible
sv:Mall:PD-trivial (redirect:sv:Mall:PD-ineligible)
tl:Suleras:PD-ineligible
th:แม่แบบ:PD-ineligible
tr:Şablon:KM-niteliksiz (redirect:tr:Şablon:PD-ineligible)
uk:Шаблон:PD-ineligible
zh:Template:PD-ineligible
It's all that I could find. 91.78.111.163 (talk) 20:20, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can add them to the /doc subpage now. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 06:25, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 2011

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move. Favonian (talk) 19:00, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:PD-ineligible → Template:PD-trivial – The proposed new name is more simple and easier memorized, especially for non-native English editors. The misprints in current name are enough frequent (inelegible, inlegible, un... (variuos), etc.). Alex Spade (talk) 11:17, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Trivial" is not an accurate adjective. The material may or may not be "trivial"; what's important is that it's ineligible for copyright protection. Powers ^T 23:42, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't offer to change text of template. -art/-text/-chem are also no accurate adjectives for their templates. Alex Spade (talk) 09:15, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. As per LtPowers, "Trivial" is not an accurate adjective to describe this template. Secondly, we should not constantly move and rename templates and pages just to cater to non-native English editors who might frequently misspell them – that are what redirects from misspellings are for. Zzyzx11 (talk) 01:44, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 2013

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was not moved. --BDD (talk) 21:31, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

– Per discussion at Template talk:PD-signature these depend on US law to determine their ineligibility due to lack of originality, therefore they should specify that explicitly (with modifications to their text as well) 76.65.128.222 (talk) 05:10, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

Oppose. If it is necessary to specify the country it is far simpler to do that with a parameter instead of creating dozens of new templates. Apteva (talk) 02:46, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Or, we could just rename all the templates, without creating a second set, to indicate that these are PD under US law w.r.t. the threshold of originality. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 03:39, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Wikipedia only requires that files are below the threshold of originality in the United States. If the file isn't below the threshold of originality in the source country, then you should just use {{PD-ineligible-USonly|name of country}} instead. --Stefan2 (talk) 19:59, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment the usage between this set of templates and the other PD-ineligible template, {{PD-signature}} is radically different. There is no specification to check if it is ineligible in the country of origin in these templates, while PD-signature requires it. So, should we add the country parameter here to make sure people check? -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 04:08, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - None of the templates requires identifying or specifying a country, although some of them have a parameter for specifying the country (which is optional to use). You need to identify the country in order to move the file to Commons, but that's another thing. --Stefan2 (talk) 08:49, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - None of the PD-ineligible templates except PD-signature have any provision for indicating a country, all the other listed PD-ineligible templates, aside from PD-signature do not take any parameters whatsoever. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 11:18, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - None of the templates requires specifying a country, although two of them have an optional country parameter. What is your point? --Stefan2 (talk) 12:50, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        Of the PD-ineligible templates, {{PD-music-ineligible}}, {{PD-ineligible}}, {{PD-text}}, {{PD-textlogo}}, {{PD-shape}}, {{PD-chem}}, none of them support any parameters at all, you mention two of them having optional parameters, but none of them have any parameter support at all, they do not take any parameters. Which two templates would you be speaking of? The only PD-ineligible template to take parameters is {{PD-signature}}, and it requires a parameter for the country of origin. Indeed, {{PD-font}} does not support countries either, and that is specifically restricted to the US, and is not named {{PD-font-USonly}} ; if we do not check the country of origin for these countries, then these are in effect, PD-US-elswhere-not-checked; so should be indicated a such (PD-US-ineligible), or should like {{PD-signature}} add a country of origin check as a required parameter. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 02:55, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
NOTE {{PD-music-ineligible}} has been added to this request, for the same reasoning, as it was missed at the time of filing. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 03:09, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Like others have stated, it is far simpler to use one template with a concise title, and with a parameter to indicate a specific country when needed. This and all these similar templates default to mentioning U.S. law solely because of the legal issues regarding the fact that the primary Wikipedia web servers and the Wikimedia Foundation are based in the United States. Zzyzx11 (talk) 05:44, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Any additional comments:

If necessary, secondary versions would take over their current names where they have to specify their origin country, and that they are also PD in those countries under their local copyright laws, as how Template:PD-signature now requires specification of country of origin PD. These would then be allowed and flagged to move to Commons. PD-US-only versions would remain on English Wikipedia, as being unacceptable for Commons. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 05:10, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
NOTE: {{PD-font}} has been requested to be renamed to be similar to {{PD-ineligible-USonly}} -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 03:29, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.