Template talk:PD-US-not renewed

This was essentially copied from Commons template PD-US-not renewed.

Explanation of the changes I just made

I removed the words "with copyright notice" because they make things unnecessarily complicated. The online copyright renewal database makes it easy to find out whether a work was renewed, but it's often much more difficult to determine whether it carried notice in the first place. It shouldn't make any difference -- as long as they were published in the U.S., they are public domain either way. Demonstrating that there was no renewal should be good enough.

I also brought over the disclaimer from the Commons version, listing some countries where works carrying this tag are likely not to be in the public domain. —Celithemis 22:45, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well done. I quite agree. Haukur 22:55, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The concept of the template is under debate

Please join the discussion at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2011 February 16 and File:Bert Acosta Obituary 1954.jpg about proving a negative when a renewal notice is not found. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 01:12, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Consistency with Commons

The explanatory text of this template differs from the text at commons for the same template. I'm planning to copy over the exact text from commons unless there are some objections. In principle, there should be no works with this tag at en.wikipedia, since public domain works should be transferred to commons. There are about 800 that could, in principle, be moved. Easchiff (talk) 07:52, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]