This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alaska, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
U.S. state of Alaska on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AlaskaWikipedia:WikiProject AlaskaTemplate:WikiProject AlaskaAlaska articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the
project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Library of Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Library of Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Library of CongressWikipedia:WikiProject Library of CongressTemplate:WikiProject Library of CongressLibrary of Congress articles
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
[[List of films considered the best#Brussels World's Fair's international poll|Brussels World Fair]] The anchor (#Brussels World's Fair's international poll) has been
deleted by other users before.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors
Disambiguation
I think that a "Gold Rush" disambiguation page should be created, as I suspect that many users of the Wikipedia search "Gold Rush" looking for the "Klondike Gold Rush." Anybody else agree? (Yes, I know that there is a link for the Klondike Gold Rush page at the bottom of the article.)--
66.188.221.6003:10, 22 March 2006 (UTC)reply
An unregistered editor, rather than deleting or changing disputed content, simply put a strikethrough through it. This violates
WP:MOS. Looking at the paragraph, which is uncited, I chose to remove it completely and place it here pending citation and correction (if the struckthrough material was incorrect).
23skidoo13:24, 6 August 2007 (UTC)reply
Since the film was originally shot at 18 frames per second, the sound version, shown at 24 frames per second, is both shorter and faster than the original silent screenings. This has the side effect of making Chaplin's slapstick routines appear more frantic than before, a fact that had probably influenced Chaplin's decision to shoot Modern Times at silent speed. By the mid-1920s, projection speeds had unofficially standardized far closer to 24 frames per second than the somewhat slower speeds common in the late-1910s. Chaplin and his crew knew that and shot appropriately. It is true that Chaplin chose to shoot some scenes for Modern Times slower than 24 fps, so that those scenes would appear to move faster when projected at 24 fps. But those kinds of variable speed shooting choices were a common fact of virtually all Chaplin films.
Using data from the United States Treasury, the stated $4,250,001 pulled in by "The Gold Rush" would be worth about $48,000,000 in 2006 dollars. Please confirm and add as necessary.
Image copyright problem with Image:LadyBouviersLover1.jpg
The image
Image:LadyBouviersLover1.jpg is used in this article under a claim of
fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the
requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an
explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
That there is a
non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.
The infobox says the film grossed $499,000 (less than it cost) but the article says it grossed $4.25 million and was the highest grossing silent film of all time! Which is it?
Gatoclass (
talk)
15:16, 23 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Copyright and home use section
I am setting up another editathon in the UK at the Cinema Museum in London with a Chaplin focus. The Assocation Chalin are being very helpful in terms of allowing photography of artifacts etc.
One area they are asking for help on page improvement is around this section.
They believe it is inaccurate and would like to replace some of the current text thus:
“In 1953, the original 1925 film possibly entered the public domain in the USA, as Chaplin did not renew its copyright registration in the 28th year after publication in accordance to American law of the time.[7] As such, the film was once widely available on home video in that country. In the years since, Chaplin's estate has blocked the unauthorized releases of The Gold Rush in the United States:
by arguing that under URAA/GATT, the copyright to the dramatic composition of The Gold Rush was restored, and therefore US copyright in the 1925 version was also restored.”
This would therefore be deleted: “However, according to copyrightdata.com, the film was first screened in the USA, thereby disqualifying reciprocal copyright recognition under §104A(h)(6)(D); and the film exceeded the 30-day rule (more than 30 days between the US and British screenings), thus also disqualifying it for reciprocal-nation copyright protection.[8] »
The page linked to for this information in the article has a link to an "exercises page" which presents the persuasive counter argument.
For URAA/GATT to apply, the work must have not have been published in the US before it was published in the other nation in question (in this case England), nor within 30 days of its publication in that other country.
The Gold Rush fails this test. It was published in the US before -- about 30 days before -- it was published in England. Published in the US on August 16, 1925 (which is well documented). Published in England September 15, 1925 (also well documented).
Since The Gold Rush fails that test, URAA/GATT does not apply, and US copyright law applies instead. Under US copyright law, since copyright was not renewed in its 28th year, at a time when that was required, The Gold Rush entered the public domain in 1953. Of course that applies only to the 1925 version, not to the 1942 version, which is protected as a derivative work under US copyright law (if URAA/GATT doesn't apply to it either, which I don't know) until January 1st, 2038.
As
requested by
Kailash29792, I have copy-edited this article. I have added a few "citation needed" tags, cleaned up some of the citations, and changed the article's structure a bit, along with the usual copy editing.
I have seen it, but not for a few years. I tried to keep the basic plot points while removing the "terrific" etc. puffery that struck me as not in keeping with the tone of an encyclopedia. –
Jonesey95 (
talk)
05:05, 21 January 2015 (UTC)reply