947:, the process was that a panel of experts selected a short list of 100. This was then voted upon by an online poll and an opinion poll conducted by the polling organisation ICM. The results of the two polls were then combined and the experts broke the ties. I'm not sure that the process is significantly different in the case of record charts, so far as copyright is concerned. There's a process of expert involvement there too - choosing representative sources and determining genre classifications. Neither of these seem very creative. They seem to be more
806:: "... polls are likely to be protectable as well because the parameters of the survey are chosen by those who conduct the polls and the selection of respondents indicates 'at least some creativity.'" The same text recommends that polls be accompanied by critical commentary so as to meet the criteria for fair use. Keeping these separate articles doesn't seem to be an option - the majority are full or partial reproductions of polls without commentary, which seems to violate the fair-use principle. Perhaps fleshing out the main
1007:: don't normally like mass deletions but this is copyright infringing territory. The way to summarize these and escape infringement is to incorporate individual ranks into the "reception" section of individual creative works. Quoting entire segments of the lists is asking for trouble from the copyright holder. I don't like how copyright law denies power to consumers. But there it is.
904:
is a compilation of hard statistics based on actual events (plays and sales). The
Channel 4 shows were based on loose polls of opinions of people who felt like voting and there is no way of independently verifying how much input Channel 4 themselves had in the final results. Therefore, the two cases
740:
spin-out articles not listed in this AfD have been (often more than once, depending on whether or not the article was re-created) variously AfDed, PRODed or SPEEDYed over the years. In my experience, "countdown"-style pages such as the ones listed above are also popular targets for vandalism (people
1107:
the list, which would supersede the original. It is only the top 10 of the list, but, again, our attorney points out that the higher numbers are the more commercially valuable. That said, I have just noticed that the only critical commentary that existed was removed without explanation at the time
964:
which is a guideline not a hard policy and so has a fair amount of wiggle room. Fair use is, by its nature, a matter of compromise and discretion not an exact rule or law. I don't see how it makes any sense to say that we can summarise the plot of a story like Harry Potter or report who won the
776:
example just list the top ten and so this is a fair use summary of the most significant part of the results. The main issue, to my mind, is that there are numerous clip shows of this kind and so there's some scope for merging our coverage. For an example of the notability of this phenomenon see
1082:
My interpretation (and I'm open to correction, naturally) is that these articles would only be acceptable if they were not lists but rather objective analyses of the subject matter (based on coverage and commentary from reliable sources) that contained a few references to poll positions (no pun
1051:), but it has not been completed because I could never launch a community discussion about how to handle it. People don't generally like to talk about copyright concerns. Previously, we had always felt confident with limited selection of much larger lists, such as the 10 out of 500 listed at
1046:
The
Wikimedia Foundation's attorney was approached about this matter when a similar list was brought to the copyright problems board, and her expert opinion is quoted liberally in that footnote. I had been working on a guideline at the time we received her recommendation
700:, is not accurate. The fact that another organisation has published part of one of these lists does not justify a belief that the material itself is copyright free. The poll results remain the intellectual property of Channel 4
154:
722:
198:
872:
I'm not buying the footnote. This seems to be copyright paranoia which has been added to the guideline recently and does not represent settled policy. What it suggests is that we'd have to delete lists like
725:, I considered starting a mass AfD just like this one, only I was distracted by other business on-Wiki and it kept slipping my mind. They're interesting pages, but the nominator's concerns regarding
957:
is very relevant here because it's not a single article that has been nominated but a big bundle. It is therefore appropriate to see what else will be affected by this broad brush action.
1059:
is an example of such an article that does not reproduce the list at all, but it is easier for that list to critically discuss contents because it is variable. More information on what
810:
article with a handful of results for each programme (Top 10? Top 5? Top 3?) and critical analysis from book sources - therefore a partial merging - would be an acceptable compromise.
115:
148:
650:
1099:
That is a fair summary of her position. Based on her feedback, I would say that the specific article in discussion here makes a poor claim for fair use, as there is little
330:
325:
468:
463:
334:
560:
555:
472:
422:
417:
741:
oh-so-subtly changing poll results to reflect their own opinions as to which is the best/worst TV show/comedy film, etc.). For multiple reasons, therefore, deletion
426:
901:
874:
564:
317:
1025:
672:
455:
376:
371:
547:
409:
380:
284:
279:
1064:
851:
514:
509:
288:
518:
363:
88:
83:
271:
238:
233:
92:
501:
242:
75:
225:
1048:
1103:
about it. Actually, in the version tagged for deletion, there was no critical commentary whatsoever; the only possible appeal to our readers
606:
601:
610:
877:
because these are based upon
Billboard's "creative" selection of country music. I do not believe there is community consensus for this.
1052:
822:
757:
593:
169:
17:
136:
1080:
I thank you for the feedback. I'm extremely interested to see the result of this AFD as it seems a clear precedent may well be set.
216:
I am also nominating the following related pages as they are also violations of
Channel 4's copyright for the reason given above:
944:
841:
837:
321:
130:
459:
1135:
1116:
1094:
1071:
1037:
1016:
999:
974:
934:
886:
863:
828:
792:
763:
711:
686:
664:
643:
551:
212:
57:
36:
413:
229:
367:
191:
A complete or partial recreation of "Top 100" or similar lists where the list has been selected in a creative manner.
313:
275:
126:
505:
451:
543:
79:
405:
359:
1134:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
970:
882:
854:. The discussion and the footnote state that it is advice from the "Wikimedia Foundation's associate counsel".
788:
267:
176:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
497:
71:
63:
817:
752:
597:
954:
911:
733:
807:
221:
194:
965:
Oscars but that we can't summarise the findings of a Top 100 poll like these. What's the difference?
772:
The
Channel 4 shows are based upon polls and so the rankings are not creative in the sense meant. The
736:
of the TV programmes in question, which is probably a strong rationale for deletion in itself. Similar
589:
1055:, but she expresses some concern that the top 10 are the most commercially valuable part of the list.
1100:
142:
726:
1113:
1068:
966:
878:
784:
162:
53:
1033:
859:
812:
747:
779:
951:
in nature and this is not a copyright consideration in the USA, where
Knowledge (XXG) is based.
732:
nevertheless seem accurate. Furthermore, none of these articles meaningfully substantiates the
990:: Long-time magnet for copyright violations, and the list article contains sufficient detail.—
948:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1012:
803:
1084:
924:
701:
676:
654:
633:
202:
961:
186:
923:) over-rule any consensus/settled policy/personal opinions that may (or may not) exist.
49:
1029:
995:
855:
197:, which contains all information acceptable and necessary. (see also previous AFD:
627:
581:
535:
489:
443:
397:
351:
305:
259:
109:
1008:
919:
It is my understanding that copyright rules (which, after all, are based on
1112:. While not restoring the full list, I've brought everything else back. --
780:
Consuming history: historians and heritage in contemporary popular culture
1056:
991:
723:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/100 Greatest TV Moments from Hell
199:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/100 Greatest TV Moments from Hell
1065:
Wikipedia_talk:Non-free content/Archive 51#A little different question
898:
calculated weekly mostly by airplay and occasionally commercial sales
1128:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
799:
1024:. I've asked for input about the possible copyvio problem at
852:
WT:Non-free content/Archive 51#A little different question
1108:
that the list was truncated from complete to the top 10,
1067:
and especially the subsection on "Attorney feedback." --
1109:
846:
697:
623:
619:
615:
577:
573:
569:
531:
527:
523:
485:
481:
477:
439:
435:
431:
393:
389:
385:
347:
343:
339:
301:
297:
293:
255:
251:
247:
105:
101:
97:
161:
1063:
recommends in terms of handling these can be read at
175:
1026:Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Copyright Cleanup
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1138:). No further edits should be made to this page.
902:List of number-one country hits (United States)
875:List of number-one country hits (United States)
651:list of Television-related deletion discussions
1083:intended) as part of the overall evaluation.
185:Clear violations of copyright as detailed in
8:
671:Note: This debate has been included in the
649:Note: This debate has been included in the
673:list of Lists-related deletion discussions
670:
648:
1049:User:Moonriddengirl/Copyright in lists
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
910:That argument in general seems like
1053:The 500 Greatest Albums of All Time
24:
842:Unacceptable use, Text example 5
960:The support for this action is
745:seems to me to be appropriate.
1117:10:40, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
1095:01:41, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
1072:10:12, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
1038:17:15, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
1017:14:13, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
1000:17:30, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
975:15:37, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
935:01:15, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
887:22:52, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
864:04:07, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
829:19:33, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
793:17:30, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
764:01:56, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
712:22:08, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
687:21:02, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
665:21:02, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
644:21:00, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
314:100 Greatest Christmas Moments
213:20:49, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
58:03:07, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
1:
452:The 50 Greatest Documentaries
193:". Articles are offshoots of
891:Problems with that argument:
544:Greatest Comedy Catchphrases
406:100 Greatest Kids' TV Shows
1155:
360:100 Greatest Scary Moments
268:The 100 Greatest Cartoons
1131:Please do not modify it.
896:the Billboard chart is "
850:following discussion at
498:50 Greatest Comedy Films
32:Please do not modify it.
774:100 Greatest TV Moments
72:100 Greatest TV Moments
64:100 Greatest TV Moments
808:100 Greatest/100 Worst
738:100 Greatest/100 Worst
222:100 Greatest Stand-Ups
195:100 Greatest/100 Worst
730:are still completely
945:a more current case
905:cannot be compared.
900:". In other words,
698:This edit rationale
1088:
928:
705:
680:
658:
637:
206:
44:The result was
1086:
949:sweat of the brow
926:
703:
689:
678:
667:
656:
635:
590:100 Worst Britons
204:
1146:
1133:
1092:
1089:
932:
929:
849:
847:added March 2011
825:
820:
815:
760:
755:
750:
709:
706:
684:
681:
662:
659:
641:
638:
631:
613:
585:
567:
539:
521:
493:
475:
447:
429:
401:
383:
355:
337:
309:
291:
263:
245:
210:
207:
180:
179:
165:
113:
95:
34:
1154:
1153:
1149:
1148:
1147:
1145:
1144:
1143:
1142:
1136:deletion review
1129:
1090:
1085:
930:
925:
845:
823:
818:
813:
798:According to a
758:
753:
748:
707:
702:
682:
677:
660:
655:
639:
634:
604:
588:
558:
542:
512:
496:
466:
450:
420:
404:
374:
358:
328:
312:
282:
266:
236:
220:
208:
203:
122:
86:
70:
67:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1152:
1150:
1141:
1140:
1125:
1124:
1123:
1122:
1121:
1120:
1119:
1114:Moonriddengirl
1101:transformative
1081:
1075:
1074:
1069:Moonriddengirl
1041:
1040:
1019:
1002:
984:
983:
982:
981:
980:
979:
978:
977:
958:
952:
938:
937:
915:
906:
892:
889:
869:
868:
867:
866:
770:Keep/merge all
767:
766:
715:
714:
691:
690:
668:
646:
632:
586:
540:
494:
448:
402:
356:
310:
264:
215:
183:
182:
119:
66:
61:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1151:
1139:
1137:
1132:
1126:
1118:
1115:
1111:
1106:
1102:
1098:
1097:
1096:
1093:
1079:
1078:
1077:
1076:
1073:
1070:
1066:
1062:
1058:
1054:
1050:
1045:
1044:
1043:
1042:
1039:
1035:
1031:
1027:
1023:
1020:
1018:
1014:
1010:
1006:
1003:
1001:
997:
993:
989:
986:
985:
976:
972:
968:
963:
959:
956:
955:WP:OTHERSTUFF
953:
950:
946:
942:
941:
940:
939:
936:
933:
922:
918:
913:
912:WP:OTHERSTUFF
909:
903:
899:
895:
890:
888:
884:
880:
876:
871:
870:
865:
861:
857:
853:
848:
843:
839:
838:That footnote
836:
835:
834:
833:
832:
831:
830:
827:
826:
821:
816:
809:
805:
801:
797:
796:
795:
794:
790:
786:
782:
781:
775:
771:
765:
762:
761:
756:
751:
744:
739:
735:
731:
728:
724:
720:
717:
716:
713:
710:
699:
696:
693:
692:
688:
685:
674:
669:
666:
663:
652:
647:
645:
642:
629:
625:
621:
617:
612:
608:
603:
599:
595:
591:
587:
583:
579:
575:
571:
566:
562:
557:
553:
549:
545:
541:
537:
533:
529:
525:
520:
516:
511:
507:
503:
499:
495:
491:
487:
483:
479:
474:
470:
465:
461:
457:
453:
449:
445:
441:
437:
433:
428:
424:
419:
415:
411:
407:
403:
399:
395:
391:
387:
382:
378:
373:
369:
365:
361:
357:
353:
349:
345:
341:
336:
332:
327:
323:
319:
315:
311:
307:
303:
299:
295:
290:
286:
281:
277:
273:
269:
265:
261:
257:
253:
249:
244:
240:
235:
231:
227:
223:
219:
218:
217:
214:
211:
200:
196:
192:
188:
178:
174:
171:
168:
164:
160:
156:
153:
150:
147:
144:
141:
138:
135:
132:
128:
125:
124:Find sources:
120:
117:
111:
107:
103:
99:
94:
90:
85:
81:
77:
73:
69:
68:
65:
62:
60:
59:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1130:
1127:
1104:
1060:
1021:
1004:
987:
920:
916:
907:
897:
893:
811:
778:
773:
769:
768:
746:
742:
737:
729:
721:. Following
718:
695:Further note
694:
190:
187:WP:FU#Text_2
184:
172:
166:
158:
151:
145:
139:
133:
123:
45:
43:
31:
28:
943:Looking at
149:free images
1005:Delete all
988:Delete all
734:notability
727:WP:COPYVIO
719:Delete all
50:Ironholds
1057:Time 100
1030:Novickas
856:Flatscan
800:footnote
116:View log
1022:Comment
921:the law
607:protect
602:history
561:protect
556:history
515:protect
510:history
469:protect
464:history
423:protect
418:history
377:protect
372:history
331:protect
326:history
285:protect
280:history
239:protect
234:history
155:WP refs
143:scholar
89:protect
84:history
1087:ŞůṜīΣĻ
1009:Dzlife
967:Warden
927:ŞůṜīΣĻ
879:Warden
804:WP:NFC
785:Warden
704:ŞůṜīΣĻ
679:ŞůṜīΣĻ
657:ŞůṜīΣĻ
636:ŞůṜīΣĻ
611:delete
565:delete
519:delete
473:delete
427:delete
381:delete
335:delete
289:delete
243:delete
205:ŞůṜīΣĻ
127:Google
93:delete
46:delete
962:WP:FU
819:Mario
814:Super
754:Mario
749:Super
628:views
620:watch
616:links
582:views
574:watch
570:links
536:views
528:watch
524:links
490:views
482:watch
478:links
444:views
436:watch
432:links
398:views
390:watch
386:links
352:views
344:watch
340:links
306:views
298:watch
294:links
260:views
252:watch
248:links
170:JSTOR
131:books
110:views
102:watch
98:links
16:<
1110:here
1091:¹98¹
1034:talk
1013:talk
996:talk
971:talk
931:¹98¹
883:talk
860:talk
844:was
789:talk
708:¹98¹
683:¹98¹
661:¹98¹
640:¹98¹
624:logs
598:talk
594:edit
578:logs
552:talk
548:edit
532:logs
506:talk
502:edit
486:logs
460:talk
456:edit
440:logs
414:talk
410:edit
394:logs
368:talk
364:edit
348:logs
322:talk
318:edit
302:logs
276:talk
272:edit
256:logs
230:talk
226:edit
209:¹98¹
163:FENS
137:news
106:logs
80:talk
76:edit
54:talk
1061:she
992:Kww
840:on
824:Man
802:at
759:Man
189:: "
177:TWL
114:– (
1105:is
1036:)
1028:.
1015:)
998:)
973:)
917:3:
908:2:
894:1:
885:)
862:)
791:)
783:.
743:is
675:.
653:.
626:|
622:|
618:|
614:|
609:|
605:|
600:|
596:|
580:|
576:|
572:|
568:|
563:|
559:|
554:|
550:|
534:|
530:|
526:|
522:|
517:|
513:|
508:|
504:|
488:|
484:|
480:|
476:|
471:|
467:|
462:|
458:|
442:|
438:|
434:|
430:|
425:|
421:|
416:|
412:|
396:|
392:|
388:|
384:|
379:|
375:|
370:|
366:|
350:|
346:|
342:|
338:|
333:|
329:|
324:|
320:|
304:|
300:|
296:|
292:|
287:|
283:|
278:|
274:|
258:|
254:|
250:|
246:|
241:|
237:|
232:|
228:|
201:)
157:)
108:|
104:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
82:|
78:|
56:)
48:.
1047:(
1032:(
1011:(
994:(
969:(
914:.
881:(
858:(
787:(
630:)
592:(
584:)
546:(
538:)
500:(
492:)
454:(
446:)
408:(
400:)
362:(
354:)
316:(
308:)
270:(
262:)
224:(
181:)
173:·
167:·
159:·
152:·
146:·
140:·
134:·
129:(
121:(
118:)
112:)
74:(
52:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.