Template talk:PD-signature

Reason for creating this template

This licence template has been created as suggested at Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2011_May_12#Signatures_of_living_persons, followed by Wikipedia_talk:Signatures_of_living_persons#RfC_on_BLPSIGN_as_official_policy concerning WP:BLPSIGN and Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2011_September_29. Thincat (talk) 12:00, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

The reason for the relevance of copyright status outside the US is given at Wikipedia:Copyrights#Governing_copyright_law with further information at Wikipedia:Non-U.S. copyrights. Thincat (talk) 12:12, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Commons has clearer information about how non-US copyrights are handled and the same policy is probably used on English Wikipedia. See commons:Commons:When to use the PD-signature tag for the commons proposed policy or guideline which, although it has not been formally adopted, seems to be stable and de facto observed. Thincat (talk) 12:22, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

I think there is two issues when using signatures. First is copyright issue: Is the signature truely PD? And secondly the privacy issue: Is it ok to publish a signature of a living person?

In my opinion we should only add this template if we know that the file is PD. And WP:BLP is not at all relevant when discussing copyright. --MGA73 (talk) 22:47, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

PD-signature

{{PD-signature}} doesn't make sense. If the signature is too simple ({{PD-simple}}) to be copyrighted in the US, the it wouldn't matter if the US has copyright relations with the originating country, but this template requires that you state that the originating country also clears it of copyright. This would be the same as making {{PD-shape}} and {{PD-text}} require that you clear it to be clear of copyright in the originating country, which is not always true either. Shouldn't PD-shape and PD-text also require the source country indication then, or shouldn't PD-signature remove it, if not. The indication of source country limitations should use {{Do not move to commons}} or else there should be US-variants for these templates {{PD-US-signature}} , {{PD-US-shape}} , {{PD-US-text}} , {{PD-US-simple}}

-- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 01:49, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

You might want to discuss your concerns at Template talk:PD-signature. The discussion there so far is mostly over privacy rights of living people. —teb728 t c 05:45, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

The above has been copied from Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 05:30, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Requested move

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) 17:11, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Template:PD-signature → Template:PD-US-signature – This template currently requires that the country of origin also be PD. However as indicated in the template, signatures usually fail the originality test under US law, so this template should not require that the country of origin be checked for PD-status, similar to how other PD-ineligible templates currently work ({{PD-ineligible}} & {{PD-text}} & {{PD-textlogo}} & {{PD-shape}} & {{PD-chem}} & {{PD-music-ineligible}} ), so this should be made to match how the other PD-ineligible templates work, without the need to check country of origin status, and be named in a manner to show that it is about the US bounds of originality. Relisted. BDD (talk) 20:57, 17 July 2013 (UTC) 76.65.128.222 (talk) 05:09, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

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. It is far simpler to use one template with a parameter to indicate the country. Apteva (talk) 02:43, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
  • But, why would we need the parameter for the country? It is PD under US law because it fails to meet the threshold of originality, and the other PD-simple templates have no provision for a country to be indicated. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 03:40, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose Use {{PD-signature|name of country}} if it is free in the source country and {{PD-ineligible-USonly|name of country}} if it isn't free in the source country. Very simple. --Stefan2 (talk) 19:56, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment should then, this template match the other PD-ineligible templates in parameterization? The other PD-ineligible templates make no requirement (and don't even accept) to have the country of origin added, this template then, is at variance with the other ones of its type. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 04:10, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
    • 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)
      • None of the other templates have any provision for indicating a country, unlike this one, all the other listed PD-ineligible templates do not take any parameters whatsover. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 11:17, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
        • 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)
          • 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}} ; There is no reason for this to be different from the other PD-ineligible templates, which for the ones listed, I've checked, and which do not take parameters, so even if this isn't renamed, the templates should be made consistent with one another. As the other templates do not take a country of origin, there is no reason for this one to either. OR, someone should modify the other templates so that they all require a country of origin parameter be set. If the parameter for the country-of-origin is removed, then PD-US-signature would be a better name, since it would be in essence a PD-US-not-checked-elsewhere template, like the other PD-ineligible templates previously listed here. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 02:55, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
• 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)
  • Comment Even if this isn't moved, the country of origin parameter is mandatory in this template, while the other related templates it isn't even supported. What is your solution to this mismatch? -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 06:14, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

• Alternately, a secondary template called {{PD-US-signature}} could be created which does not have the country of origin parameter. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 05:09, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
• NOTE: {{PD-music-ineligible}} has been added to the other request. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 03:07, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
• 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)

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.