Wikidata talk:WikiProject Media Representation/Archive 2

This page is an archive. Please do not modify it. Use the current page, even to continue an old discussion.

Copyright of lists

Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

At Wikidata:WikiProject Media Representation/Task Forces there are some lists of movies from BBC (Q9531) and Alliance of Women Film Journalists (Q1659564).

English Wikipedia has had past discussions about the copyright of lists.

en:Wikipedia:Copyright in lists

The general rule is that when a list is objective, then it is not eligible for copyright. When a list is subjective, like an organization's collection of favorites, then it is a creative work and copyrighted.

The BBC list comes from BBC's The 100 greatest films directed by women (Q105406968).

@Wallacegromit1, Valentina.Anitnelav: You contributed to this page. I cannot myself judge the copyright of this situation because copyright never anticipated machine generation of human readable media like this from a database process based on citations. Can either of you or anyone else say something about how Wikidata should manage the copyright of these lists?

I would not want this project to develop and draw lots of attention, then have copyright issues disrupt it. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:39, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@Bluerasberry: & @Valentina.Anitnelav: Thanks for highlighting this issue.

As we are not using the ranking of the Films anywhere, and just pointing out that they are on these lists. Would this not be a Copyright exception?
If it is easier, we can remove the labelled/sectioned lists, and just have a single chronological listeria Wikidata:WikiProject_Media_Representation/Task_Forces/First_Metadata_Film_Festival_Listeria. And we can just point to the websites for people who want to explore further? As the point of the festival is to add metadata, regardless of its rank or inclusion status on these lists. Wallacegromit1 (talk) 18:08, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Unfortunately I don't know enough about this to judge the situation. The lists are created via described by source (P1343) <source> statements. Should we delete these statements? This should be probably discussed in the general Project Chat. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 19:28, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Keep Each of you gave a reason here that copyright does not apply. I say keep, but come up with a policy so that in the future nothing needs to be removed.

Valentina, you point out that Wikidata is not reproducing the list as a written work. Wikidata already had structured data about all these movies, and Wikidata already has a broad general practice of annotating source metadata such as in WD:WikiProject Source Metadata and meta:Wikicite. The activity here is matching citations to movies. That is activity which we already do for all kinds of sources, and the fact that some sources are lists should not affect our curation workflows.

Wallace, you point out that the Wikidata community is not indiscriminately collecting all the information from the sources. In this case that includes not taking the rankings. I do not think it should be a general rule to always avoid taking in rankings, but in this case, that is what happened. Also it seems that in addition to the lists, the AWFJ page presents additional movies which are not ranked, and not on the list, but it seems that the Wikidata workflow only identifies what the source discusses rather than copying the list. To me that also makes this process not about a copying of a list.

I like the idea of looking to expert recommendations and media profiles, which may take the form of lists. For now I think things are fine. Everything would be more robust and stable with any kind of community review. I think we did a good review for these lists and that this is resolved. Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:57, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Short Films

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

@Wallacegromit1: I think that many of the fiction/drama film tests are not really applicable to short films. Even the Bechdel Test is sometimes odd to apply to short films (especially for "introverted" short films). I have general doubts about the following tests:

Waithe Test
Feldman Test (I think this one is clearly not applicable to short films)
Landau Test
Russ Test
Tauriel Test
Raleigh Becket Test
Coates Test

Basically all tests that require certain events to appear or not to appear or certain character developments/relationships to be shown/not to be shown - they require an extended storyline and a bigger cast than most short films have. I think most short films would neither clearly pass nor fail those tests. What do you think about "limiting" them to feature films (of course people can still apply them to short films - which may make sense if they clearly pass or fail the test - and I would not delete such statements but I would not advise this). - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 11:33, 12 March 2021 (UTC) @Wallacegromit1: repinging as I forgot to sign - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 11:34, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

@Valentina.Anitnelav: Agreed! We can use either "not applicable (Q105773175)" or "passes (Q105773168)" to all short films. "fails (Q105773155)" does'nt really apply to short films. But, as you say, will not remove it if someone applies it. Will add "feature films only" in the instructions and short films can be judged on a case by case basis. We do not need to actively add them to short films. Wallacegromit1 (talk) 14:40, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Landau Test

Latest comment: 3 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

I am planning to create the below:

Landau Test

has characteristic (P1552)=passes the Landau Test

has characteristic (P1552)=fails the Landau Test

If the Landau Test is failed, the following can be used as qualifiers;

criterion used (P1013)= A primary female character ends up dead

criterion used (P1013)= A primary female character ends up pregnant

criterion used (P1013)= A primary female character causes a plot problem for a male hero/protagonist (excludes male antiheroes)

If the Landau Test is passed, the following can be used as qualifiers to highlight further tropes;

criterion used (P1013)= A primary female character is kidnapped or needs saving

criterion used (P1013)= A primary female character ends up married

The Landau test can be modified to include these additional qualifiers as well?

Notified participants of WikiProject Media Representation

Please let me know if the above requires any modifications?

Is there a way to see the above qualifiers in the queries as well?

And maybe we should somehow include statement is regarded as spoiler for (P7528) or say in the Project Page that the results of the tests may be considered spoilers? Wallacegromit1 (talk) 13:14, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

@Wallacegromit1: I agree, just a few comments:

I'm not sure about the additional criterion used (P1013) for the Landau-Test. They were not included in the test introduced here, or did they? I'm thinking about a general way to indicate tropes/clichés, maybe I will bring this up for discussion at Wikidata:WikiProject Narration, soon.

Is there a way to see the above qualifiers in the queries as well? - Yes (I could write an example query, when we have more data)

I think statement is regarded as spoiler for (P7528) could apply to any of the tests/statements: so I would tend to point this out at this Project Page, not for every statement. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 21:51, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

@Valentina.Anitnelav:

I cant remember where we had this discussion, but if a woman/man has a child at the very end of the movie, it will only be counted as a "pregnancy", if the child seems to fulfill the character in a major way, but will not be counted if they just appear. This can be judged on a cases by case basis right?

I am wondering about Orlando (Q188384), as at the very end the character has a child in a fulfilling manner, but the characters do not even interact in any way, and the moment is very small. However, the gender of the character is an important aspect of the movie, and the ability to be able to have a child, though not stated directly, can be an important visual statement. I believe the work "passes" the Landau test, or maybe the movie is too ambiguous to make it "not applicable"? Wallacegromit1 (talk) 15:01, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

@Wallacegromit1: This film is also on my watchlist. I could give my evaluation after I have seen this. But as you describe this situation "passes" (maybe with "dubious") makes sense to me. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 13:10, 14 March 2021 (UTC)