![]() |
Template:PD-textlogo 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. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
PD-textlogo template. |
|
"Similarly, it is not possible to copyright common geometric figures or shapes such as the hexagon or the ellipse, a standard symbol such as an arrow or a five-pointed star. Likewise, mere coloration cannot support a copyright even though it may enhance the aesthetic appeal or commercial value of a work. For example, it is not possible to copyright a new version of a textile design merely because the colors of red and blue appearing in the design have been replaced by green and yellow, respectively. The same is true of a simple combination of a few standard symbols such as a circle, a star, and a triangle, with minor linear or spatial variations." [1]
Fred Chess 15:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Hucz ( talk) 11:31, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
While this template says that a text-only logo is not eligible for copywrite, Template:PD-font claims this only applies if the image is raster. Wikipedia:Public domain#Fonts is unclear, but the reasoning used and cited law do not back up PD-font's assertion that vectors made from rasters are illegal. The legal opinion says that the vector font file itself cannot be copied, and that another font cannot be derived from the information contained in the vector font. It does not say that outlines themselves (which is all that SVG retains) is copyrightable.
We need to straighten this out. Are we being extra careful and not allowing Wordmark SVGs to ever be considered free, as we have with image files in general? If so, we need to change Template:PD-textlogo and remove it from all SVG files that do not have a free license claim.
— trlkly 15:42, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
In the US typefaces can not be copyright, I'm not sure how this affects the copyright of logos originating in the US vs elsewhere. However, if a logo is copyright elsewhere, Commons may not want it, and it may affect how we use it too (and even the US status?).
Rich
Farmbrough, 01:30, 20 November 2011 (UTC).
There is a move discussion in progress on Template talk:PD-ineligible which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 05:13, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was moved. -- BDD ( talk) 19:34, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Template:PD-textlogo → Template:PD-logo – The nature of this template make it suitable for all logos, be it text, simple shape or both mixed. In the meantime, some people keep changing its transclusions on shape-only logos to {{ PD-shape}}, a template that does not have logo-specific text and links. Hopefully, this rename would put a stop to them.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (
talk)
07:18, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
{{PD-ineligible logo}}
?Category:Public domain images ineligible for copyright (textlogo) has been nominated for renaming. The nomination is related to the move of this template, discussed above. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page. – Wdchk ( talk) 03:57, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Can someone review the new logic in Template:PD-logo/sandbox, and swap the sandboxed template over for the new one?
The changes:
Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 01:36, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
|commons=
parameter adds a vague "File is not compatible with Commons requirements" sentence. What's wrong with inserting a {{
Do not move to Commons}} with a proper |reason=
on a case by case basis?|commons=
, and 2 additional parameters, |reason=
for adding a reason to the do-not move logic and |file=
to give the filename on Commons if it exists to handle the now-commons logic. Ideally most of this logic could be split off into it's own logic and you just call THAT template with pass through paramaters?|reviewed for Commons=
parameter. This parameter, when absent, categorizes the file into a "need for review" category and displays a notice explaining that such files must normally either be moved to Commons or tagged with {{
Do not move to Commons}}. A reviewer reviews the file and sets the |reviewed for Commons=yes
. This is a cheap way of not having to implement the functionalities of three additional templates at the same time, which is what you are trying to do right now.|usonly=
parameter could cause the additional template to be invoked automatically. (The template still needs to be called though for reasons to do with categories and tools as I understand it.).I want to include an info box into the majority.fm article, best with the
logo image included. Now, how do I manage that? Do I ask the folks at
http://majority.fm if they agree to release the icon under one of the wikipedia acceptable terms? Starting with the ones that leave the most rights to them? If so, are there templates or howtos how to do so? Since I don't have the time to read all through all possible terms for such images and break them down into a few words short enough for them to read but still correct enough not to misrepresent the term(s)... Or is there another way to be sure that the logo falls under {{Template:PD-logo}}}? Or is there a place on :commons: where I find the folks that can best answer my question?
As I see it, the logo indeed falls under the rationale of This image or logo only consists of typefaces, individual words, slogans, or simple geometric shapes. --
Rava77 (
talk)
13:48, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
![]() | It was proposed in this section that
Template:PD-logo be
renamed and moved to
Template:PD-textlogo.
result: Links:
current log •
target log
This is template {{
subst:Requested move/end}} |
Template:PD-logo → Template:PD-textlogo – The reason it was moved to {{ PD-logo}} from {{ PD-textlogo}} was that "the template is suitable for logos with geometric shapes, too" — but such logos with very few shapes are still generally called textlogos. The template's naming should also match that at commons, so naming it {{ PD-textlogo}} makes sense for consistency. Elliot321 ( talk | contribs) 12:04, 16 January 2021 (UTC) —Relisting. ( t · c) buidhe 20:28, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
It would be nice if we had a "no categorization" parameter for demonstration purposes. Something like this would work:
{{Imbox | type = license | image = [[File:PD-icon.svg|52px|Public domain|link=]] | imageright = [[File:Heptagon.svg|64px|Simple geometry|link=]] | text = This image or logo only consists of typefaces, individual words, slogans, or simple geometric shapes. These are not eligible for [[copyright]] alone because they are '''[[threshold of originality|not original enough]]''', and thus the logo is considered to be in the '''[[Wikipedia:Public domain|public domain]]'''. See {{section link|Wikipedia:Public domain|Fonts}} or [[Wikipedia:Restricted materials]] for more information.<br /><small>Please note: The public domain status of this work is only in regards to its copyright status. There may be other [[intellectual property]] restrictions protecting this image, such as [[trademark]]s or [[design patent]]s if it is a logo.</small><div style="display:none;"> <span class="licensetpl_short">PD</span> <span class="licensetpl_long">Public domain</span> <span class="licensetpl_link_req">false</span> <span class="licensetpl_attr_req">false</span> </div> }}{{#if:{{{nocat|}}}||{{image other | [[Category:Public domain images ineligible for copyright (logo)]] }}{{free media}}}}<noinclude> {{documentation|template:PD-ineligible/doc}} </noinclude>
We could then call it with {{pd-textlogo|nocat=yes}}
.
weeklyd3 ( message me | my contributions) 21:40, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
They are virtually identical. The only difference is that {{ PD-simple}} says "image" where {{ PD-textlogo}} says "image or logo". What's the point of having them both? Some usage of their backlinks? INS Pirat ( talk) 13:43, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please sync with Template:PD-textlogo/sandbox, which adds a blank alt param to the files per MOS:BLANKALT. It also uses the modern {{ file other}} instead of the depcrecated {{ image other}}, and moves {{ free media}} inside of the file other template so it is clear that it only applies in the file namespace. Thanks! House Blaster talk 01:58, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
![]() |
Template:PD-textlogo 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. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
PD-textlogo template. |
|
"Similarly, it is not possible to copyright common geometric figures or shapes such as the hexagon or the ellipse, a standard symbol such as an arrow or a five-pointed star. Likewise, mere coloration cannot support a copyright even though it may enhance the aesthetic appeal or commercial value of a work. For example, it is not possible to copyright a new version of a textile design merely because the colors of red and blue appearing in the design have been replaced by green and yellow, respectively. The same is true of a simple combination of a few standard symbols such as a circle, a star, and a triangle, with minor linear or spatial variations." [1]
Fred Chess 15:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Hucz ( talk) 11:31, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
While this template says that a text-only logo is not eligible for copywrite, Template:PD-font claims this only applies if the image is raster. Wikipedia:Public domain#Fonts is unclear, but the reasoning used and cited law do not back up PD-font's assertion that vectors made from rasters are illegal. The legal opinion says that the vector font file itself cannot be copied, and that another font cannot be derived from the information contained in the vector font. It does not say that outlines themselves (which is all that SVG retains) is copyrightable.
We need to straighten this out. Are we being extra careful and not allowing Wordmark SVGs to ever be considered free, as we have with image files in general? If so, we need to change Template:PD-textlogo and remove it from all SVG files that do not have a free license claim.
— trlkly 15:42, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
In the US typefaces can not be copyright, I'm not sure how this affects the copyright of logos originating in the US vs elsewhere. However, if a logo is copyright elsewhere, Commons may not want it, and it may affect how we use it too (and even the US status?).
Rich
Farmbrough, 01:30, 20 November 2011 (UTC).
There is a move discussion in progress on Template talk:PD-ineligible which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 05:13, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was moved. -- BDD ( talk) 19:34, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Template:PD-textlogo → Template:PD-logo – The nature of this template make it suitable for all logos, be it text, simple shape or both mixed. In the meantime, some people keep changing its transclusions on shape-only logos to {{ PD-shape}}, a template that does not have logo-specific text and links. Hopefully, this rename would put a stop to them.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (
talk)
07:18, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
{{PD-ineligible logo}}
?Category:Public domain images ineligible for copyright (textlogo) has been nominated for renaming. The nomination is related to the move of this template, discussed above. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page. – Wdchk ( talk) 03:57, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Can someone review the new logic in Template:PD-logo/sandbox, and swap the sandboxed template over for the new one?
The changes:
Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 01:36, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
|commons=
parameter adds a vague "File is not compatible with Commons requirements" sentence. What's wrong with inserting a {{
Do not move to Commons}} with a proper |reason=
on a case by case basis?|commons=
, and 2 additional parameters, |reason=
for adding a reason to the do-not move logic and |file=
to give the filename on Commons if it exists to handle the now-commons logic. Ideally most of this logic could be split off into it's own logic and you just call THAT template with pass through paramaters?|reviewed for Commons=
parameter. This parameter, when absent, categorizes the file into a "need for review" category and displays a notice explaining that such files must normally either be moved to Commons or tagged with {{
Do not move to Commons}}. A reviewer reviews the file and sets the |reviewed for Commons=yes
. This is a cheap way of not having to implement the functionalities of three additional templates at the same time, which is what you are trying to do right now.|usonly=
parameter could cause the additional template to be invoked automatically. (The template still needs to be called though for reasons to do with categories and tools as I understand it.).I want to include an info box into the majority.fm article, best with the
logo image included. Now, how do I manage that? Do I ask the folks at
http://majority.fm if they agree to release the icon under one of the wikipedia acceptable terms? Starting with the ones that leave the most rights to them? If so, are there templates or howtos how to do so? Since I don't have the time to read all through all possible terms for such images and break them down into a few words short enough for them to read but still correct enough not to misrepresent the term(s)... Or is there another way to be sure that the logo falls under {{Template:PD-logo}}}? Or is there a place on :commons: where I find the folks that can best answer my question?
As I see it, the logo indeed falls under the rationale of This image or logo only consists of typefaces, individual words, slogans, or simple geometric shapes. --
Rava77 (
talk)
13:48, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
![]() | It was proposed in this section that
Template:PD-logo be
renamed and moved to
Template:PD-textlogo.
result: Links:
current log •
target log
This is template {{
subst:Requested move/end}} |
Template:PD-logo → Template:PD-textlogo – The reason it was moved to {{ PD-logo}} from {{ PD-textlogo}} was that "the template is suitable for logos with geometric shapes, too" — but such logos with very few shapes are still generally called textlogos. The template's naming should also match that at commons, so naming it {{ PD-textlogo}} makes sense for consistency. Elliot321 ( talk | contribs) 12:04, 16 January 2021 (UTC) —Relisting. ( t · c) buidhe 20:28, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
It would be nice if we had a "no categorization" parameter for demonstration purposes. Something like this would work:
{{Imbox | type = license | image = [[File:PD-icon.svg|52px|Public domain|link=]] | imageright = [[File:Heptagon.svg|64px|Simple geometry|link=]] | text = This image or logo only consists of typefaces, individual words, slogans, or simple geometric shapes. These are not eligible for [[copyright]] alone because they are '''[[threshold of originality|not original enough]]''', and thus the logo is considered to be in the '''[[Wikipedia:Public domain|public domain]]'''. See {{section link|Wikipedia:Public domain|Fonts}} or [[Wikipedia:Restricted materials]] for more information.<br /><small>Please note: The public domain status of this work is only in regards to its copyright status. There may be other [[intellectual property]] restrictions protecting this image, such as [[trademark]]s or [[design patent]]s if it is a logo.</small><div style="display:none;"> <span class="licensetpl_short">PD</span> <span class="licensetpl_long">Public domain</span> <span class="licensetpl_link_req">false</span> <span class="licensetpl_attr_req">false</span> </div> }}{{#if:{{{nocat|}}}||{{image other | [[Category:Public domain images ineligible for copyright (logo)]] }}{{free media}}}}<noinclude> {{documentation|template:PD-ineligible/doc}} </noinclude>
We could then call it with {{pd-textlogo|nocat=yes}}
.
weeklyd3 ( message me | my contributions) 21:40, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
They are virtually identical. The only difference is that {{ PD-simple}} says "image" where {{ PD-textlogo}} says "image or logo". What's the point of having them both? Some usage of their backlinks? INS Pirat ( talk) 13:43, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please sync with Template:PD-textlogo/sandbox, which adds a blank alt param to the files per MOS:BLANKALT. It also uses the modern {{ file other}} instead of the depcrecated {{ image other}}, and moves {{ free media}} inside of the file other template so it is clear that it only applies in the file namespace. Thanks! House Blaster talk 01:58, 16 February 2023 (UTC)