Template:Did you know nominations/Antarctic Sound
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Gatoclass (talk) 07:56, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Antarctic Sound[edit]
Antarctic, the first vessel to navigate the sound
- ... that the Antarctic Sound was named after the first vessel to navigate it, which was later crushed by ice?
- ALT1 ... that the vessel that first navigated the Antarctic Sound was later crushed by ice?
- Reviewed: Great Famine of Mount Lebanon
5x expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 07:33, 20 February 2016 (UTC).
- DYKcheck tool confirms 5x expansion and more than sufficient characters. Neutrally phrased with reasonably good citations: the one statement missing a citation was the one used in the hook! It was such an easy fix, though, since the naming of the sound for the ship is mentioned in a source that is used later in the article, that I just put the citation in the lede myself. I generally prefer shorter, punchier hooks, but I think the added length of your first hook works better as a phrase and adds that "named for" piece that I think enhances it. We have a potential problem, though, with the photo: I like it, even at small size, and it appears in the article, but I'm concerned that it's not as free as we want it to be. It appears in H.R. Mill's book on Antarctica published in London in 1905, which qualifies it for a "public domain in the U.S." tag, the only indication about its copyright status that I saw. Hugh Robert Mill, though, was very long-lived, dying in 1950, and my very limited knowledge about UK copyright is that it extends to 70 years PMA, which (if I'm right) would mean this photo might be under copyright in the UK until 2020. Does anyone know more about this than I do? Especially you, Cwmhiraeth? Obviously it can go without the photo, but the photo's quite nice and I'd be happy to find it could be used. Jwrosenzweig (talk) 08:02, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- I am not knowledgeable on copyright matters and had imagined (perhaps naively} that a photograph taken in 1902 and published in 1905 would be out of copyright. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:11, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
Given FunkMonk's note, I think this can proceed, then--the necessity of taking the photo off of Commons is separate from the question of whether it can be used for DYK, or at least that's the impression I'm getting. Cwmhiraeth, I agree that it wouldn't have occurred to me that there would be a copyright issue on a photo this old, until me trying to do due diligence as a DYK reviewer led me down the rabbit hole. Congrats on a nice article: Jwrosenzweig (talk) 19:50, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Absent a license showing that the photo is free—which, given that the photo has just been nominated for deletion from Commons, is in question—I don't see how the photo can be used with this nomination. Calling Chris Woodrich for a second opinion. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:24, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
- Deletion from Commons is exactly what I proposed. It can be uploaded locally to Wikipedia En (which only follows US law) after deletion there. FunkMonk (talk) 22:29, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
- Copied from the deletion nomination: The UK policy for attributed photographs is seventy years after the author's death. For photographs "of which the author is unknown and cannot be ascertained by reasonable enquiry", public domain status starts seventy years after publication or (if unpublished) seventy years after the photograph was taken (Template:PD-UK-unknown). This was published in 1905, meaning that, if "reasonable enquiry" has taken place, this is PD in the UK. One should ask 4ing what enquiry was done before transferring the file to Commons, and we can ask Brianboulton if there was any attribution in the book itself. Having the standard set at "the whole crew" is, quite frankly, unworkable, and to the best of my reading not provided for by British law." I agree, of course, that having this hosted locally (as it was originally), is the safest course of action, but we shouldn't be so afraid of potential copyright that we delete images which can quite easily be public domain without any discussion. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:40, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
- The photograph in Mill's book (facing p. 426) is inscribed: "Photograph supplied by Dr. Otto Nordenskjöld". As Nordenskjöld died in 1928 there should be no PD issues with this image. Brianboulton (talk) 23:57, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
- I've since amended the image by providing the author and license tag of 70 pma. Image is good to go, should a promoter wish to use it. There is still a deletion tag on it, but it was started by me. Deletion tags haven't prevented images from being used on the Main Page in the past. Jolly Ω Janner 07:15, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
- Deletion from Commons is exactly what I proposed. It can be uploaded locally to Wikipedia En (which only follows US law) after deletion there. FunkMonk (talk) 22:29, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
