Talk:List of films in the public domain in the United States/2021

Category for public domain films
So how come this site doesn't have a category for films that are in the United States public domain? There's still tons of public domain films floating around that aren't recorded on this page. Wouldn't it be easier and more convenient to make a category page so we wouldn't have to constantly wrestle over which movies are notable enough to make it onto this page? 2603:6000:D203:BBF7:98C5:945A:9556:129E (talk) 05:37, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I am a bit surprised there isn't one actually. I could have sworn there was such a category at one point, so maybe it was deleted? Betty Logan (talk) 22:57, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
 * It would probably be a good idea. Not long ago, with the Copyright Term Extension Act's 20 year extension, not many works of an type were newly going into the public domain. This was true of all works, but particularly true of a younger art-form like film, where there was not a very large body of very old works.
 * I'd be all for such a category, with guidance to avoid a stealth improper categorization; although this may lead into a WP:OR morass. TJRC (talk) 00:14, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

There was one a long time ago, it was deleted because PD status of films is too context sensitive, it's not always black and white. Thus this list with sources and comments. For anything pre-1924 there is a category for that already, same for government films. -- Green  C  00:25, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Errors being introduced, redux
A year later, an IP editor is again introducing errors, on pretty much the same basis. See, among other edits and.

In the case of "The Brain That Wouldn't Die" : the the basis for its public domain status (unchallenged) is the lack of a notice on publication in 1962. So it went PD in 1962. The IP editor changes this to 1990, which would be the year it would have gone PD if it had had a proper notice, but had failed to be renewed 28 years later. But that's wrong, it has nothing to do with renewal.

Same with "Charade" : it was published without notice in 1963, so went PD in 1963; the 1991 would-have-been renewal date has nothing to do with it.

The IP editor's other edits appear to be making the same assumption, adding dates with no basis for them, but seeming to be relying only on guesswork about renewal. TJRC (talk) 04:53, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm at my WP:3RR limit, and the obstinate IP editor continues to re-add the errors and ignore invitations to discuss (left both in edit summaries and on their user talk page). Any other editors from the prior discussion want to take a crack at explaining?
 * BTW, the previous discussion that I was referring to just got archived; it's at Talk:List of films in the public domain in the United States/2020 now. TJRC (talk) 05:12, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Persisting with re-inserting erroneous content and refusing to discuss it is borderline vandalism in my book (I use the word "borderline" only because the editor may be operating under the misunderstanding the content they are adding is correct). It would take a very harsh interpretation of the 3RR rule to block you for reverting more than three times in this scenario, although I can appreciate you not wanting to take that risk. The editor needs to come to the talk page and explain his reasoning; if he believes the sources are wrong then we need to see alternative sources. If it continues we have to consider semi-protection. Betty Logan (talk) 15:06, 19 November 2021 (UTC)


 * True, but I tend to err on the side of caution. The 28-year period they keep insisting on suggests they know something about copyright, and while I'm confident I'm right in my own edit, I'm mindful of the edit-warring guidance "Claiming 'My edits were right, so it wasn't edit warring' is not a valid defense."
 * What frosts my Rice Krispies, though, is the IP editor's continued insistence on making the edits and refusal to discuss; both last year and now. (As far as I can tell they're likely the same individual with slightly different IPv6 IP addresses due to reassignment over time; compare (September 2020) and  (November 2021), for example.) TJRC (talk) 00:53, 20 November 2021 (UTC)


 * What I would suggest is that next time it happens include a link to this discussion on the talk page in the actual edit summary. They are clearly familiar with the revert button so once the link is there in the edit summary they can't claim to have not seen it. If they refuse to engage in the discussion then I think we can safely assume they are WP:NOTHERE. I will be keeping an eye on it too and will revert if it happens again, but you guys are so fast you always beat me to it! The next step will be semi-protection if it happens again. Betty Logan (talk) 03:14, 20 November 2021 (UTC)


 * I did do that, but sadly, it made no difference. TJRC (talk) 04:11, 20 November 2021 (UTC)