Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day/Archive 11

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

@Sumanuil, Gnom, Onel5969, and Anomalocaris: - just checking the status of Template:POTD/2024-01-01: currently it has a "coming soon" placeholder image in it. I assume the intention is that because the Steamboat Willie thing is coming out of copyright in the new year, we'll upload it to Commons that day and then substitute it in.

I have no issue with this in principle, it's quite a good story (although the POTD would have to be expanded to include some commentary on the film itself, not just its public domain status). Howeveer, I can foresee a few issues with this:

1. Presumably, the public domain status will only kick in when the clock turns to midnight in the US, which would be already five hours into the scheduled run of the POTD.
2. We won't be able to do the usual thing of having a protected version of the POTD extant for the day before the run
3. Someone will have to switch it in very quickly when the allotted time does come round
4. We'll also have to wait for Commons protection to kick in on the new file (or for an admin to fully protect it over there)

Not sure if you've thought of any of these issues, but given this another option might be to have it run on the 2nd instead - almost as good and would resolve everything. CHeers  — Amakuru (talk) 20:07, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Re #4, that bot runs every 10 minutes. Schwede66 21:44, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Indeed. So realistically, after the clock strikes 5am, i.e. midnight (assuming we go by US eastern time?) we would have maybe 20–30 minutes to upload the video, get it protected, and then send the POTD live. I suppose if there were an appeitte for it, as a sort of IAR option, we could always put the previous day's POTD in the 1 January slot initially so it continues its run past midnight, then swap it over once everything's in place... (probably not by me, as I'm unlikely to be awake at 5am on NYD, either from the previous day or the next day's perspective!)  — Amakuru (talk) 23:19, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

I see. I hadn't really followed what the plan was but now I understand. Midnight EST is 6pm where I am, hence I can take on these tasked if we decide that's what we want to do. I have to say I quite like the placeholder idea; quite quirky! Schwede66 00:04, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

That said, what is written under Steamboat Willie#Copyright status doesn't fill me with confidence that the item will have a clear run on Errors. Schwede66 00:20, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I have no idea about that. My head always spins when I try to get my head around some of these things! It sounds like probably the copyright itself will definitely expire (barring any 11th-hour actions) but the trademark not. I guess normally trademarks aren't really a problem for us, maybe? Perhaps there will be a deletion discussion at Commons if and when it's uploaded, and the experts will weigh in, but with this goal of running on 1 January, that doesn't really give us any leeway.  — Amakuru (talk) 00:36, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

@Amakuru and Schwede66: Hello, and thank you so much for helping with this fun little project. As I originally had the idea for this POTD, I'm happy to answer your questions.

• First of all, there is really nothing to worry about copyright-wise: Yes, Steamboat Willie will enter the Public Domain under U.S. copyright law on 1 January, and even the Walt Disney Corporation agrees with that, which is why they doubled up on trademark protection for Mickey Mouse over the last couple of years. (For some background, I have a Ph.D. in copyright law, which is what got me interested in this story in the first place.)
• The file that we will display is File:Steamboat Willie (1928) by Walt Disney.webm, which is a 1080p version of the film that has already been uploaded, deleted, and checked by Commons admins. So to confirm, nothing needs to be re-uploaded, it's already on Commons and will be un-deleted just in time.
• I wrote an entire blog post about Steamboat Willie entering the Public Domain that will be published on the WMF blog on 1 January (at midnight UTC). A number of news outlets will be reporting on this as well.

Thank you again, and let me know if you have any additional questions! --Gnom (talk) 08:45, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Do you have a Commons admin on standby for the undeletion and the protection, Gnom? Schwede66 09:00, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Indeed, and this admin must also be put in charge of protecting the video for the day when it's uploaded. Or at least allow time for the Krinklebot protection to kick in. I'd also be interested to understand the implication of the timezone question above. If the copyright is registered in the Eastern US then we still need to wait until 5am UTC to publish. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 09:04, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

No, we don't have a 'designated Commons admin' yet, maybe it is a good idea to have one – I can take care of that.

For the question regarding intertemporal law, my position would be that we can just un-delete the image at 10.00 pm UTC, and 'flick the switch' at midnight UTC – after 95 years of copyright protection, there will be no fuss about a few hours give or take. De minimis non curat praetor. Gnom (talk) 10:08, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the response, and it sounds like it's all mostly good. And with all due respect for your PhD in copyright law, which sounds like an impressive achievement indeed, you'll forgive me for being a bit sceptical about taking chances and being a bit woolly with regard to timing. Asserting that "there will be no fuss about a few hours give or take" is not really the same as the "precautionary principle" that I would expect us to take when it comes to main-page content. This is particularly so, as noted at the earlier deletion discussion, Disney is known for being highly protective and litigous about their content. So in short, unless someone from the WMF legal team, or a strong consensus of those who know about legal issues here on Wikipedia, says it's fine, I think we should stick with the 5am plan. Schwede66 do you concur with that, and thanks also for the offer to do the honours re the switcheroo!  — Amakuru (talk) 11:07, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Well, I think not even Disney would be so crazy as to send a DMCA to the WMF (which is all they can do) a few hours before ET midnight, and even if they did, it would become moot by the time someone in San Francisco reads it. But I totally understand if you prefer to rather go live at 5.00 am UTC. Gnom (talk) 11:47, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Without having WMF Legal on board, I’d rather not chance it. Schwede66 16:19, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Kia ora Podzemnik, do you know whether you will be around on 1 January at 18h for this undeletion task? Schwede66 16:23, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

I'll very likely be somewhere in the bush Podzemnik (talk) 18:08, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Was hoping you’d say that. Enjoy! I’ll go tramping today myself; back Saturday. Schwede66 18:56, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

• It's a good idea to post Steamboat Willie as a non-Wiki friend of mine mentioned it the other day and so there's already some buzz about this. Commons is not a significant obstacle because the image can be loaded and protected directly on the English Wikipedia. The admin instructions for ITN list the various ways of posting an image to the main page quickly. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:03, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
• @Amakuru: The only problem with this is that Steamboat Willie isn't a featured picture. It's recent nomination (Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Steamboat Willie) failed, so probably something other should be scheduled for that day. Regards, Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 06:42, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

  @Armbrust: oh... what a good point - I can't believe I didn't even think about that! We're so busy tying ourselves in knots over the copyright status, and yet the (non)-video itself isn't even an FP. I've moved it to Draft:POTD/Steamboat Willie for the time being, I guess it can be resurrected sometime in the year if and when it's uploaded and if the community confirms it as an FP. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 22:43, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

  This saddens me. Can we not make this an exception? Gnom (talk) 22:45, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

  Agree with Gnom that we should make an

  WP:IAR exception here. Looking at the FPC nom, it didn't fail because it was undeserving but because it wasn't available to be uploaded yet. If someone uploads a high resolution version, it seems like a formality to get it approved. Since the essence of IAR is to take action that's in line with the spirit of our policies/principles even if a procedure gets in the way, it seems applicable IMO. BTW I've cross-posted this discussion at VPM, since it's probably of interest to more than just those who watch this page. — Rhododendrites ^talk

  \\ 23:15, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

  Thank you, @Rhododendrites. FYI, we do have a high-resolution (1080p) version uploaded on Commons and ready to be undeleted on 31 December just before midnight. Gnom (talk) 23:35, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

  @Gnom: It would probably be helpful if you could produce a link to the uploaded version somewhere on the web where people can access it now (without being an admin on Commons). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 00:53, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

  WP:IAR in this case makes sense to me too. This seems like it will be a significant cultural event in an area with a direct relevance to us, but getting it officially past FP in time seems unlikely to happen since we can't upload it until the instant we'd want to make it PotD for the exact reasons it's going to be a significant cultural event and what makes it relevant to us. Anomie⚔

  14:16, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

  The thing is, there's no version for anyone to assess. I think putting a non-featured-picture in the today's featured picture slot is really a no-no. Part of the reason it was rejected at FPC was because nobody could vet the quality of the supposed uploaded version, what resolution it was and all that. All I'd say is, if you want to make this an IAR case then as a prerequisite you'll need to somehow convince the regulars at

  WP:FPC that this warrants an IAR. If it's possible to somehow make it clear to people what the proposed video actually is, and then get Armbrust to sign off that a consensus has been formed, then I'll be happy to assist at POTD-level in whatever fashion you want - even if that means swapping the FP into its slot midway through the day and possibly relisting it again some other time too. I'm not against this running, but the correct boxes do need to be ticked. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk

  ) 20:42, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

  The thing is, there's no version for anyone to assess -

  WP:FPC that this warrants an IAR - Disagree. This is of much wider interest than the handful of FPC regulars. IMO the point of the IAR action here is to put this file on the main page, not to make it a FP without FPC and then put it on the main page. — Rhododendrites ^talk

  \\ 22:03, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

  @Rhododendrites: You can see a lower resolution version (360p) on Youtube. However, the Commons admins have confirmed that the version they are ready to undelete comes from Disney Video (video.disney.com, this link may be not accessible if you're outside the US) and its resolution is 1080p. Gnom (talk) 22:45, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

  IMO the point of the IAR action here is to put this file on the main page, not to make it a FP without FPC and then put it on the main page. I was going to say the same thing. The "FPC regulars" don't have any special say if the rule we're ignoring is that the PotD needs to have passed FP. Which is what has been suggested above. Anomie⚔ 01:42, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

  Hi all, this is a great idea, and I'm happy to supply the technical work to make this happen. I would suggest we have two versions of the POTD, one for pre-5am UTC and one for after. The one before can have a placeholder icon (copyright logo?) and a blurb that explains how it will become public domain at midnight EST (bonus points if someone can whip up a tiny JavaScript countdown clock). Then when it's undeleted on Commons (automatically detected using {{#ifexist:}}), the blurb switches to the real video and whatever text we originally wanted.

  As one of the operators of KrinkleBot that does the autoprotection on Commons, we can have the bot protect it ahead of time so it kicks in right away after undeletion. Or we tell the undeleter to protect it for 24h. Or both.

  And I'm 100% on board with what everyone else has said re: IAR. Legoktm (talk) 15:56, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

  If it’s a high res video and those are usually approved as FPs, then IAR is appropriate. Schwede66 17:19, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

  Re: countdown, should we really use JavaScript on the Main Page? It might bring accessibility concerns, especially when it is used in the most popular Wikipedia page. {{countdown}} could potentially work well, though it requires page purging and I don't know whether something bad would happen if the Main Page is constantly purged. ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 12:44, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

  As long as the script is done with progressive enhancement and has proper error handling in case of really old browsers, it should be fine from that perspective. Whether people would want the necessary script added to sitewide JS even if someone wrote it I don't know. Anomie⚔ 13:54, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

  I see; I was a bit worried whether JS-related error handling was possible. I've found this user script that could help, and there was a related MediaWiki:Common.js failed feature request a while back. ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 14:10, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

  What do you think of this? The countdown should appear if you install this script I just created derived from ToxiBoi's script I linked in my second reply. Disabling JavaScript in the page makes the countdown disappear. (On a side note, I omitted the number of days left, since when it appears in the Main Page it will be 0.) ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 16:04, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

  I have made a few more tweaks to the countdown proposal, such as the addition of "This image will be replaced by a video of the film in a moment." when the countdown ends and the file hasn't been uploaded. It's worth mentioning that the page restarts when the countdown ends. Removed this feature. I need some feedback about this before I ask about its implementation at the

  technical village pump. I have just got a problem; {{#ifexist:}} does not detect whether a file on Commons exists, it can only detect local files. I guess the video should also be localized to Wikipedia as soon as it's uploaded on Commons? ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings

  ) 22:34, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

• WP:IAR is that we should ignore rules, if they prevent us from improving or maintaining Wikipedia. I don’t see how that would apply here. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus}
  19:54, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
  • I'd have thought it would be pretty obvious from the statements above: Several of us here think that this file, as it goes into the public domain, would be an excellent PotD. The rule that PotD is supposed to be an FP would prevent that. Nitpicking over what might be "improving" or "maintaining" is similarly against the spirit of the rule. Anomie⚔ 01:23, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
• I have now worked on the article by fixing and removing maintenance templates (the article should probably be without them if it appears in bold on the Main Page!). I also expanded the POTD draft's blurb with more information about the film, while adding inline citations in the article to confirm those facts. It should be mostly finished. So... @Legoktm and Anomie, thoughts on the countdown and {{#ifexist:}} issue? ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 17:56, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
  • When you use File: it checks if a (local) file page exists rather than checking if an actual file exists. Try using the special Media: namespace instead. Anomie⚔ 18:45, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

    Works now, thanks! I might ask about the countdown implementation to the VPT soon, since no one has voiced opposition to the countdown. ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 19:03, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

• Would you all agree to make an RfC on whether the video can appear as a POTD on that day or not? A user has suggested this at the VPT. Pinging active participants in this discussion: @Amakuru, Anomie, Armbrust, Gnom, and Schwede66. ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 22:06, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

  No, I would not support that. If those who look after the main page are happy with what's proposed, that's good enough. We are way too close to the event for an RfC to be useful. Schwede66 22:15, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

  Hello @ObserveOwl, thank you for helping us move the discussion forward. I am happy either way, but @Schwede66 is probably right. Steamboat Willie was a major milestone in the history of animation, and we have a high-resolution version coming directly from the distributor, so there is surely no doubt that this is an excellent item for POTD. Plus, 1 January will be the day it will be in the news (and it already is), the WMF blog and social media accounts will cover it on that day as well, so it's just too 'cool' to let this opportunity pass – that is my personal opinion, of course. Gnom (talk) 23:43, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

  There's not time for a formal RfC. So far, of people who've commented here, only Armbrust and Amakuru have argued against. Their opposition seems to have been on the basis that it has not passed FPC, with a suggestion that they thought that IAR was going to be applied to declare it an FP without it passing FPC. Amakuru has not commented since the clarification that the rule we're proposing to apply IAR to is the rule that the PotD is supposed to be an FP. Armbrust has commented since then, but only with a statement that suggests he wants to strictly apply the "rule" of IAR to somehow disqualify IAR from being applied. Anomie⚔ 02:00, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

  Thank you all for your input, really appreciate it. I was also surprised when an RfC was suggested so I had to ask you. I also think it would be a good POTD, though people at the VPT really dislike the idea of a JS countdown. It won't be included in the POTD blurb, I guess . ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 07:52, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

  I have to say that I am also not a big fan of the countdown idea, to be honest.--Gnom (talk) 12:57, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks, it's good to know what others think of it. I have been requesting feedback here since two days ago, and only got some after asking the village pump like fifteen hours ago, so I've been quite nervous about it lately. I will follow consensus whether it tells me that a countdown is appropriate or not. I've made a few tweaks to the draft; do you think it could now be moved to Template:POTD/2024-01-01? ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 13:47, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

  Yes, please. Gnom (talk) 22:22, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

  You need to get approval at

  WP:FPC before this is moved to the POTD space. Per Armbrust's comment above, this was expressly discussed in October at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Steamboat Willie and there wasn't consensus, so a further decision would be needed to reverse that. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk

  ) 23:33, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

  @Anomie: and sorry, I hadn't specifically seen your message above, I've been only sporadically online over Christmas and still travelling until Friday. I'm not against the idea of running this per se, but I do disagree that it's valid to apply IAR to it, given that the FPC very specifically discussed exactly the scenario that's being proposed here and many participants rejected the candidacy due to being uncomfortable approving an unseen image to the main page. My advice would be to ping in everyone who participated at the above FPC and perhaps start a fresh one including everyone here, explaining clearly which video is planned and what its resolution is, etc, with the goal of wrapping up a clear consensus (or lack thereof) by the 31st. Without that buy in and overturning of the earlier decision, I would strongly oppose running this.  — Amakuru (talk) 23:57, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

  You're welcome to your opinion. Personally I don't see that

  WP:POTD, nor am I convinced that 4 opposes (some of which seem not to apply to the current situation) versus 5 supports is convincing to block this. Anomie⚔

  00:39, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

  After some following the discussion here, it seems astounding that there are editors who wish to put at risk this being the picture of the day. Any use of procedural barriers will only discredit the whole project. Incidentally, this subject is established in press coverage, including a full showing of the video at [1]. ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 08:57, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

• Just so they're aware of this discussion - pinging in all participants from the prior FPC - @Adam Cuerden, Armbrust, Bammesk, Geni, Gnom, Janke, MER-C, Nick-D, Paul 012, The Herald, and TheHistoryBuff101:. To be clear, I don't object to any of this myself - although I have some misgivings about whether we'll get the best version available on the day, I an certainly see the appeal of doing this and I'm happy to IAR myself and go with the flow, knowing the topic is of very strong encyclopaedic interest and that we know the video would ordinarily be a slamdunk for FP. Happy to help out if I can too, although as noted it's unlikely I'll be awake at midnight eastern time! Let's just make sure we're clear that we have that consensus and that we have a rough plan of how to proceed on the day though, preferably with people lined up to fulfil the various roles outlined. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 22:01, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
  • TL;DR to answer some of the questions raised: although I have some misgivings about whether we'll get the best version available on the day The file to be used is c:File:Steamboat Willie (1928) by Walt Disney.webm, which a commons admin has verified is "the 1080p version from Disney Video" (and see also c:Commons:Graphic Lab/Video and sound workshop/Archive/2023#Steamboat Willie (the first-ever animated film featuring Mickey Mouse)). preferably with people lined up to fulfil the various roles outlined I think the only role really needed is undeletion at Commons. Above User:Podzemnik indicated they would be available, plus it's listed on c:Category:Undelete in 2024 and Commons currently has it set for c:Template:Motd/2024-01-01 so I think we can trust someone over there will do it at an appropriate time (if they decide earlier than 00:00 EST is ok I'm inclined to trust their interpretation of c:Commons:Precautionary principle). Beyond that, I suppose someone here could purge the main page once the undeletion happens if MediaWiki doesn't handle that itself when the Commons file is undeleted. Anomie⚔ 22:26, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

    Just a question, if the proposal succeeds, should the POTD template use {{#ifexist:}} to automatically substitute the placeholder, or will it be manually swapped? If it's the former,

    salted (if that's the Commons term) by Commons admins, at least from midnight to 5 a.m. UTC. ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings

    ) 09:07, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

    Oh, and the local file File:Steamboat Willie (1928) by Walt Disney.webm should be protected as well. ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 09:25, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

    I have protected the local file just now, so that's covered. As for the Commons version, I think the choice is either (a) gain a commitment from the Commons admin who undeletes the file at 00:00 ETC to also fully protect it for the day, or (b) amend the template to explicitly show the placeholder only and then have an en-wiki protect the new file and then do the switcheroo as soon as it is safe to do so. I might prefer (b) myself, assuming we can find someone to do the job at this end, as it's a little less prone to risk.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:48, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

    protected on commons for the next week. I wont be around when it needs undeleting mind.©Geni (talk) 07:39, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

• I've just had a look at Template:POTD protected/2024-01-01 (due to go live in just under 3 hours) and it already had the video linked. The consensus below is that we start with the placeholder image for the first 5 hours. I've thus restored that placeholder image and will self-revert at 5am UTC. Schwede66 21:17, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks @Schwede66. I've set up {{show by date}} to automatically do the 5am UTC switchover, the Main Page will just need to be purged at that time. Legoktm (talk) 22:41, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Concrete proposal

I am a regular at

1. A 1080 version of the Steamboat Willie animation is posted by Disney at This link.
2. A faithful reproduction of the 1080 animation was uploaded to Commons, in WebM format, at This link. The file was then deleted, and it will be undeleted [2], i.e. restored, on January 1st at 00:00 EST, i.e. 05:00 UTC.
3. Between 5:00 UTC and 5:30 UTC on January 1st, the Commons admins and en-Wiki admins will protect and switch the main-page POTD to the animation, with its corresponding template-blurb currently at Draft:POTD/Steamboat Willie Template:POTD/2024-01-01.

• FWIW, I support this proposal. Bammesk (talk) 03:22, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
• I, too, support this proposal. Cullen328 (talk) 03:50, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
• Support as per what I wrote above. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 04:12, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
• Support this. This is a major event for the
  third pillar. A rule (POTD must be a featured picture) is preventing us from improving the encyclopedia. Therefore, we should ignore it. HouseBlaster^talk
  05:25, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
• (Responding to ping,) also a support from me (to be clear, my support is also for giving it the FP star). I'm still not entirely sure this will be the best quality available, but considering the time-sensitivity of the proposal, at 1080p it should be good enough (we can replace it later if a better version emerges). I'm open to either having a placeholder image accompany the Steamboat Willie blurb for the first five hours, or extending the POTD for 31 December, but in the former case we still need to choose the placeholder image or create that countdown timer. --Paul_012 (talk) 06:04, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
• Support We should do this. The placeholder picture will do for the first 5 hours. Schwede66 08:30, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
• Support per what I wrote above. I also in this case trust that, if Commons decides to undelete at an earlier time, they've properly applied c:Commons:Precautionary principle and we can follow their lead (i.e. the effect of how Template:POTD/2024-01-01 is currently coded with #ifexist). Anomie⚔ 12:52, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
• Support (responding per ping and as participant of the OG nom) per FPC nom. Also per HouseBlaster's statement about our Third Pillar. Totally agree to that and yes, it will be slam dunk for POTD, FPC and Free license culture. I'm good to go as long as we get the best (1080p works for me too) unadulterated version on the Main Page. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 14:09, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
• Support - as long as the technical aspects are resolved, I'm fine with this. I suppose a formal FPC can follow afterwards, but there seems little reason why it would be rejected. Also, per above, I suggest we proactively hold off posting it until 5am even if Commons decide to upload the video earlier unless WMF legal specifically advise us otherwise. Commons is a separate project from ours, and their visibility is lower than the en-wiki main page, so it doesn't follow that the same rules apply.  — Amakuru (talk) 16:27, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

  Thank you, everyone. This makes me really happy. @HouseBlaster put it best: This is going to be a major event for the free culture movement. Gnom (talk) 17:04, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

• Support per
  WP:NOTBURO. Andrew🐉(talk
  ) 17:52, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
• Support This is a historic moment, may as well take advantage of it. Fully endorse the use of IAR here. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 22:06, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
• Support After all the years Disney has lobbied for legislation to keep its stuff under copyright, to the detriment of free information, I think that featuring Steamboat Willie as it (finally) enters the public domain is one in their eye and a really great idea. I'd even support doing it earlier on the grounds that the copyright has expired in Guam and the Northern Marianas Islands, if that legally lets us run it earlier.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:54, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
  • The deal with earlier than 00:00 EST is that the law seems to be silent on which timezone might apply, and no one has found any precedent beyond that a few hours compared to the 95 years may be considered de minimis. Lacking that and any opinion from WMF lawyers, caution is likely to win out. Anomie⚔ 01:38, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
• commentThere are two deleted versions of the file at File:Steamboat Willie (1928) by Walt Disney.webm on commons. pretty sure its the second one that is wanted mind.©Geni (talk) 07:36, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
• Support Go for it ASAP.-
  WP:WAWARD
  ) 22:13, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose I think that trying to do it on the first possible day - dealing with the ambiguities of time zones as they affect copyright law (Remember, midnight UTC on Jan 1st is about 4-7 pm the day before in America) - is a mistake. A couple days won't hurt us.
  FPs
  . 07:08, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
• Support the use of IAR here. The use of
  WP:ERRORS regarding adding a thumbtime parameter to the image so we can display the famous whistling scene (instead of some other frame). — RAVENPVFF · talk
   · 16:31, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
• Support. This is a historical moment, invocation of IAR seems appropriate here given the circumstances. SkyWarrior 17:06, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
• Comment: Pamela Chestek in an informal comment says «I would go with the time zone of the situs of the infringing act. If I draw Steamboat Willie at 11:59 it's infringing, at 12:01 it's a non-infringing reproduction», 15 usc 262 is mentioned too. Make sure the undeleting admin is not in American Samoa, and do not notify the Wikimedia Foundation until after midnight Anywhere on Earth. In fact, just let someone outside the USA undelete the file according to their timezone. (Update: that just happened. Undeleting admin was in Japan.) Nemo 17:18, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
  • 15 USC 262 does seem interesting and potentially relevant. 🙂 Although where the "act" for something online actually occurs seems like it could still be an open question. Where the undeleting admin is? Where the servers are? Where each visitor being served the video is? Anomie⚔ 18:18, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
• As Nemo mentions, the file on Commons has already been undeleted, so the ifexist magic doesn't really matter, it'll go live at midnight UTC, which I think is fine. One comment from
  Brion VIBBER, who manages a lot of the video handling in MediaWiki, they said: "i would strongly recommend against placing a video on the main page that has just been uploaded, renamed, or undeleted". Since it's been undeleted ahead of time, that's fine and I've already set all the transcodes, which have now finished. For some reason the file on Commons isn't actually 1080p, I've asked why a version was uploaded with lower resolution. I'll also be online at midnight in case there are any technical issues/assistance needed. Yay! Legoktm (talk
  ) 17:56, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

  It's been deleted again... ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 18:03, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

  (precautionary ping to Legoktm re the above, apologies if you’re already aware) ‍—‍a smart kitten_[meow] 18:17, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

  @Gnom: can you confirm that there's a Commons admin on standby to undelete the video at midnight EST? Legoktm (talk) 19:23, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

  Noting here for reference that the video has been undeleted again ‍—‍a smart kitten_[meow] 20:40, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

• Just caught wind of this... support 1080p version and alert me when the next FP nomination for this video occurs. This is very nice. -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 00:22, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
• The video that has been posted has a 1929 (not 1928) copyright claim on it.-
  WP:WAWARD
  ) 05:11, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

  Yes, but it was actually published in 1928. A claim that is dated one year forward is not invalid (one that was two years forward would be), but the term is still only counted from the actual year of publication, which is well-attested. D. Benjamin Miller (talk) 06:49, 1 January 2024 (UTC)