Talk:Vatican's list of films

"We cannot have lists that are selected based on subjective criteria in full on Wikipedia"
Why not? I don't understand that criteria. There are a lot of full lists on Wikipedia, based on subjective criteria. In articles on different movie/videogame/whatever magazines there are often lists of "perfect scores" or something like that and it has never been a problem (for exsample: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famitsu_scores). I just don't understand what is the problem. Alesceh91 (talk) 11:02, 18 June 2023 (UTC)


 * you are correct. Please return list. 174.214.16.199 (talk) 06:59, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
 * It's not even subjective criteria! But I suppose that the unhappy soul that decided to remove the list (much to the dismay of their unwashed dishes) can't spot the difference between The Avengers and A Man for All Seasons. Maybe they think that those movies ended up in the list merely by will of God, but I am sure they took down the list by will of Satan. Bring it back! C.H. Freire (talk) 22:12, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi, if the criteria were not subjective, can you explain what the objective criteria were? — HTGS (talk) 22:57, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Yep, this article is pretty worthless now without having the actual list in it. Very dumb. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.225.195.185 (talk) 05:59, 20 June 2023 (UTC)


 * yes please return the list. They made a mistake 174.214.16.199 (talk) 06:58, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Just a note to all readers, the list itself is copyrighted, as it is an example of a creative work. The vatican, and the members of the media council used their discretion to construct the list, and selected works that they deemed “good”, “valuable”, “important” or any other value that was based on criteria. While we are used to lists being public information in some form, this is usually because such lists are picked based on criteria (eg, tallest buildings, most album sales, or places in North America). More information about the distinction, and when lists may be under copyright, can be found at: Copyright in lists. — HTGS (talk) 00:26, 4 December 2023 (UTC)


 * @HTGS I wonder if it's actually copyrighted. As far as I know the list was never published (in the conventional sense) by the Vatican, rather, it was sent out as part of a missive to episcopal conferences around the world, some of whom then published the list themselves. The list does not exist on the Vatican web site (though also worth noting that the Vatican allows other entities to freely reproduce papal encyclicals etc). 98.7.2.105 (talk) 02:51, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately the question of “publication” has a very weak standard for the era we are talking about. See: Copyright law of the United States, where, “The United States copyright law protects "original works of authorship" fixed in a tangible medium… This protection is available to both published and unpublished works.” — HTGS (talk) 17:06, 20 December 2023 (UTC)