Author talk:Wystan Hugh Auden

PD-related tag removed
Have commented out the PD-US-no-renewal tag because no such unrenewed works are listed on this page, and the burden is on the poster to demonstrate that such works exist. Macspaunday 19:55, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Have also removed lists of pre-1940 works that an earlier poster perhaps thought were PD but aren't; they are copyright in the UK under the life-plus rule; the same texts were copyrighted in the US in the US edition of Auden's Poems, which was renewed. Macspaunday 04:00, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * We use copyright-until to hide works that are covered by copyright. John Vandenberg 08:12, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Indeed. Wikisource can also be a valuable bibliographic resource, whether or not we can include the copyright works themselves. Eclecticology 09:20, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * OK by me. I've fixed some of the mistakes in the original list, and will try to fix the omissions, etc., later on. (Later: have now noted copyright for those early works; an earlier poster had marked those early items as "placeholders", apparently meaning that the actual texts would be supplied afterwards; but the actual texts are protected by copyright and can't be added here.) Macspaunday 14:33, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it's necessary to put a no licence tag on an author page. After all it's the works not the authors that need licensing or other rationale for being there. Also, when it comes to links to pages which you suspect are copyvios, there is nothing wrong with having those links. Maybe the other site's owners have a reason which we don't know about; there are too many factors that we can't know about. For edge cases they have accepted whatever risk is involved; if they have problems with it the link will just go dead. Eclecticology 08:01, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


 * That's OK with me. My whole point is that an earlier editor seems to have added all the items listed on this page for the sole reason that he was under the mistaken impression that Auden's early books were PD-not-renewed; the editor notes in the page history that he added titles as "placeholders", and this evidently means that he expected to see the text added later. This was simply a mistake. None of those works are PD - not one. The page should probably be deleted altogether because it cannot include anything by Auden until 2023. There's no reason to keep something that seems to exist at all only because of a mistake. Macspaunday 12:54, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


 * We probably agree that most, if not all, of Auden's works do not belong in Wikisource. Whether we keep the author page is a different matter.  If it's only purpose is as a directory of what we have you are right.  It can still serve as a general bibliography, it can still serve as an information source about the copyright status of an author's works, and it can still be used to link to outside sources where the copyright status may be interpreted differently.  The author page does not usually include anything by the author anyway. Eclecticology 19:15, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


 * This is a popular mistake; see Scriptorium. John Vandenberg 19:27, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


 * An interesting discussion on the page linked immediately above. Thanks for alerting us to it here. I don't have any strong views about this, and am happy to leave the debate in the hands of administrators. Macspaunday 20:52, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


 * It has been decided; the scope of Wikisource has changed, and this page will probably be named in the announcement of the change. John Vandenberg 12:38, 15 January 2008 (UTC)