Talk:Will to power (disambiguation)
 | This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
AfD
[edit]Article listed on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion Apr 26 to May 3 2004, consensus was to keep and list on cleanup. Discussion:
As of this moment, it seems to be a series of quotes or extracts from various works. If it is work in progress, we need to give the author some time, if it is meant to be an article, it may be unsalvageable. PaulinSaudi 12:40, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Delete if not improved by the end of five days. -- Graham :) | Talk 16:17, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. Possible copyvio[1]. I doubt anyone is intending to expand it. Niteowlneils 17:45, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- This article was just started today. Watch for improvements and some actual content, and delete if none is seen. This is an important topic in Nietzsche's philosophy, so if some content can be generated by all means keep. -Seth Mahoney 21:38, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Keep and list for cleanup. A vastly important concept in the philosophy of Nietzsche. Texts are very likely public domain; no inherent problem in basing an article on Nietzsche on his own words. Smerdis of Tlön 16:17, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Question. The texts cited are translations. Can a translation be copyrighted even though copyright for the original text has expired? (And do we know for sure the copyright on the original has expired? Yes, it's been more than a century. I know.) And if the texts are copyrighted, can we claim fair use? No vote yet. Wile E. Heresiarch 04:31, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. Yes (Wile E.), translations are independently copyrightable, but these small passages would seem to fall under fair use for an encyclopedic entry. (Not that anyone should be trusting Wikipedia as a definitive source, by any means.) Anyway, I feel that if it's cleaned up, it would be better than nothing. Wikisux 05:16, Apr 30, 2004 (UTC)
- On second thought, there's a pretty good summary under Nietzsche, so could we just redirect there instead? Wikisux 05:19, Apr 30, 2004 (UTC)
- Rework or redirect. This is essential to understanding Nietzsche's philosophy.
--Phil Larin 05:59, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)
End discussion
It was relisted on VfD in July on 2004 and was redirected. See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Will_to_Power for that discussion.
Copyvio?
[edit]Ok, I did some of the Cleanup, per the CU page, and I think the top part of the article is fair now. It could be better, and there are lots of Nietzscheans who could expand and contextualize. I've read the book, and a fair amount of other Nietzsche, but I'm no fan, so I wasn't interested in doing much more. That said, this article sat on Cleanup for 2 months, and it seems like no one was inspired to alter it much. My question is this: Nietzsche's sister is long dead, and his works are very Public Domain. However, Walter Kauffman is not public domain, that I'm aware of. These huge sections all credit (thankfully) the translator, but do we have any proof that we have permission? Is it public domain and I'm just wrong to assume otherwise because it's 20th century? I see that people thought that this was probably fair use, but I'm not sure, and people thought that the copyright expired. Can't any German speakers do a private translation of the texts and avoid the whole problem? (I say this because there are plenty of translations that keep their copyrights current.) Since the article is about to roll off Cleanup, I was on the verge of blanking all those quotes, but I don't want to do that if there is permission or the translation is public. Geogre 20:11, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)