Talk:This Is Just to Say

Use of the poem text viz. fair use, copyright, and WP:NFC (DO NOT ARCHIVE)

Since the the poem was first published in 1923 and the poet died in 1963, in case anyone has any questions about the copyright status, I have added the analysis and rationale below. I am unsure if the poem is in the public domain, so providing a rationale for fair use for the poem's text within the article is necessary, and I assert herewith why I believe that its use is permissible under the fair use doctrine and the policies and criteria discussed at Wikipedia:Non-free content.--ColonelHenry (talk) 16:33, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Per the criteria at WP:NFCCP

(1) I do not believe there is a free equivalent available;
(2) I doubt that it will undermine Williams' commercial opportunities as (a) this poem is ubiquitously published and cited in a myriad of works about Williams and his work, it appears on public monuments (including in the NJTransit section of New York City's Penn Station).
(3) The poem's brief text will be used once only in the article on the poem itself. It cannot be broken into a portion since the work is so brief.
(4) The poem has been published in a ton of places--more than anyone could count--in print, online, carved into stone.
(5) I believe its use meets general Wikipedia content standards and is encyclopedic, and will facilitate an appropriate analysis and understanding of the poem through its article.
(6) I think this poem's inclusion meets WP:NFCCEG on the acceptable use of text, and conforms with WP:LYRICS.
(7) The poem's text will only be used in the article about the poem.
(8) It is hard to aid a reader to understand this exceptionally brief poem without them having the poem in front of them.
(9) See #7 which applies herewith.
(10) Does not apply since this is not an image, however full attribution is given within the article for the poem text included.

An Interpretation

I'm not the smartest man alive, so I don't wish to write this explanation of the poem, but I'd like to throw an idea out there for it's meaning. I think that it's about betrayal and the story of someone taking advantage of a lover or a husband or a wife or a girlfriend, or something of that sort. I have neither the tact, intelligence nor the tact to extrapolate on this idea, so... please use my comments if you find them useful. Get back to me if you would wish to talk with me about your feelings on this poem.

No, it's not about betrayal. It's about plums.Manormadman (talk) 15:24, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's about the betrayal of the plums, so to speak. He's obviously taunting the reader; "They were delicious/so sweet/so cold." And he/she was "probably/saving/for breakfast." He's being a jackass. Whether there's a deeper meaning or not, the poem - in my opinion - is too short to do anything but pontificate on. Aero777x1 (talk) 09:44, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There's probably more than one correct interpretation. --MrsNadienne1 (talk) 02:16, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's about expressing a sense of entitlement: I get to betray your trust by eating the plums you were saving, and I also get to demand that you forgive me for it. Or more succinctly, and as a generation and a half of American poets pretty generally agree, it's about WCW being a jerk. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.103.213.26 (talk) 18:41, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright Issues

Dear Gwern,

Your copyvio justification for removing the whole text of the poem is unconvincing. In my edit summary I described that the entire text of this SHORT and WELL-KNOWN poem is necessary for fair criticism, comments, and scholarship to be generated (in other words, FAIR USE). Disclosure: I am a licensed attorney fluent in copyright law and I studied English literature in my undergraduate studies (therefore fluent in poetry and fair use - both issues implicated here). I know fully well what fair use does and does not allow.

Your stubborn removal of the piece merely because it is a WHOLE work completely neglects the unique poetic structure of the piece. In other words, it is not possible to give excerpts of this work. This would be akin to making an excerpt of a copyrighted haiku piece, which makes no sense. See Frank A. Pasquale III, Copyright in an Era of Information Overload: The Law and Economics of Information Overload Externalities, 60 VANDERBILT L. REV. at 28 (2006).

Lastly, I have reviewed Wikipedia's fair use policy and have to say that there is NOTHING in the policy prohibiting a user from uploading a copyrighted work in its entirety. For instance, ENTIRE copyrighted photographs may be uploaded to Wikipedia under a fair use rationale. Why? Because you cannot cut half of a photograph to make fair use "portions". Likewise, ENTIRE copyrighted short songs (under 30 seconds - i.e. the length of a full commercial) may be uploaded. Thus, ENTIRE works such as a short poem WHICH MAY ONLY BE UNDERSTOOD AS A UNITED WHOLE are eligible for the fair use exemption both under existing U.S. copyright law and under Wikipedia's fair use policy.

I respectfully ask that you cease and desist your free speech chilling activities and allow the text in.

Regards,

130.192.203.170

I responded on my talk page to your comment. --Gwern (contribs) 05:30 15 May 2007 (GMT)

And I'm not going through your talk page. Explain it here. The poem goes back, there's no good reason for it to not be back. If there is a better solution that you know of then you should implement the solution, and that does not include not including the poem. Darqcyde (talk) 02:08, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article Expansion

I took the liberty of expanding this article. Please help to continue improving this article by adding relevant content. Notecardforfree (talk) 06:33, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great work improving the quality of this article! I have a couple comments I wanted to leave here for posterity's sake. First, according to WP:NPS, it is a good decision to leave out the poem's full text. And, as it's copyrighted, even a fair use claim probably wouldn't cover use of the entire poem. Other than that, as the article continues to grow, you'll want to expand the introduction as per WP:LEAD. I'd suggest looking for more sources, perhaps a biography of Williams or a collection of critical essays, that discusses critical response, impact, and analysis of the poem (I might have access to some so I'll do what I can in the next couple weeks). Your current sources aren't the best examples of reliable sources - especially Cliff's Notes. If you want to see one (of a couple) example of a full treatment of a poem on Wikipedia, see what I did at "The Raven". I'm not sure a poem of this length will ever get to featured, but there's no reason we shouldn't try, right? Great job on this, and I hope to see you continue improving poetry-related articles! --Midnightdreary (talk) 14:45, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the helpful and constructive feedback. You are absolutely correct in that the sources used in this article are not of the highest quality, so I'll be making a trip to my local library as soon as I get a chance to do more research. I'll also send of a letter to the estate of WCW to see if they will let us reproduce the entire poem here, as I think it would significantly contribute to the article's quality. Fantastic work on "The Raven," by the way. Cheers, Notecardforfree (talk) 17:44, 16 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Perhaps useful

I don't have a copy, but the book Literature: An Introduction to Fiction, Poetry and Drama by Kennedy and Gioia appears from a google books search to have a little history on the writing of this poem. If anyone has easy access to a copy, does it have anything useful to add? 212.159.69.4 (talk) 22:28, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This American Life

The This American Life link doesn't seem to connect to a particular episode. - Jmabel | Talk 02:38, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edits

The description of the poem had suggested that the poem reads like a note left on an ice box. While I agree that it reads like a note, I disagree with the interpretation of where the note was placed/found. By mentioning the ice box in the poem, Williams/the speaker is directing the reader's attention to the ice box, likely from a general location like a kitchen table. (You wouldn't stick a note on the fridge that said, "Your sandwhich is in the fridge"; the note would most likely be somewhere a reader would easily notice it.) --MrsNadienne1 (talk) 02:23, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article isn't appropriate for an encyclopedia.

This is an analysis of a poem. There are reference works that include analyses of poems, but encyclopedias are not among them. This article is so very unlike anything that I have ever encountered in Wikipedia that I'd have to come to the conclusion that it is not meant to conform to the standard purpose of such a work. Instead, I believe that its most apparent purpose is to provide high-school students with the opportunity not to have to do their own thinking when they are assigned this poem to analyze. That's not the purpose of an encyclopedia, either. 72.92.3.205 (talk) 20:37, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]