Talk:Clarence Winthrop Bowen

improved article

I improved the article and removed the tag for deletion--Elisa.rolle (talk) 11:00, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because...

CaroleHenson, that is not true that is a copy and paste from the sources you said. The main body of the article is from the obituary of Clarence Winthrop Bowen, published in the Yale University Bulletin in 1936; the Bulletin is posted on Findagrave and that is the first source I have listed. The current Bulletins do not have copyright, but in any case, this was published 1936, so 70 years expires in 2006 (https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/find-a-grave-prod/photos/2015/51/47812031_1424585599.jpg). But I did non only copy and paste, I included other searches, like the marriage, some info about his father, and the fact he was the first PhD of Yale Department of History. wikipedia says that for public domain content you have to copy (COPY) and then gave the link to the public domain source, which I did where it's available. If you think is better, I may change it to the not online source (Yale Bulletin are stored online from 2001). I'm not sure I agree this is copyright violation, it's pretty clear the info are the same from the obituary, but I did not took them most of them from the sources you listed, but from the Yale Bulletin, which is public domain. I'm willing to work it in a way that is acceptable, but sincerely I do not know how, without deleting important information --Elisa.rolle (talk) 07:56, 7 April 2017 (UTC) --Elisa.rolle (talk) 08:12, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

CaroleHenson, sincerely I do not understand. The report says 52% was copied by Historical New England and this is what you have there:

Clarence Winthrop Bowen (1852-1935), fifth child of Henry Chandler and Lucy Maria (Tappan) Bowen, was born on May 22, 1852. From 1869 to 1873, he attended Yale College. Following graduation, he spent a year at Yale Divinity School before he abandoned his goal of becoming a minister. Bowen went on to earn a Masters and Ph.D in history from Yale College in 1876 and 1882, respectively. He worked as a reporter for the New York Herald Tribune became publisher and owner of the Independent newspaper, contributed to Century Magazine, and published several books on national politics and history. In 1887, he was appointed Secretary of the Committee on the Centennial Celebration of the Inauguration of George Washington as President of the United States. From 1907 to 1931, he served as President of the New York Genealogical and Biographical Society. Also, he was a founding member of the American Antiquarian Society, the American Historical Society, and the Connecticut Historical Society. Clarence was the author of The Boundary Disputes of Connecticut (1882) and Woodstock: An Historical Sketch (1887). On January 28, 1892, he married Roxana Atwater Wentworth (1854-1935), daughter of John and Roxanna Marie (Loomis) Wentworth of Troy, New York; they had one daughter, Roxana Wentworth Bowen (born 1895). Clarence Bowen died on November 2, 1935.

aside that these are info from the Obituary, therefore, in case, it's the Historical New England who should concur on copyright violation, BUT as I said, that is not the case since the obituary is public domain. But above is just a small part of what I wrote, how it's possible that is amounting to 50%? And in any case I state again. The Source is the Obituary. The Historic New England have the same Source. I'm not sure it's right the rule of first use right use and that I should be forced to change my article since it was used by the Historical New Egland first, but I'm willing to try.

Elisa.rolle - I removed the tag while we sort this out. Let's start by:

• Updating the citation information with the date of the material and add {{PD-notice}} at the end of every citation that you think is in the public domain. One of the item says that it's from 1859 - that's the date of the painting. The content used in the article, though, is copyrighted with a date of 2017.
• What you need to look at in the copyvio report is the items highlighted in red that shows where there is the some content in both sources - and click on "compare" after each source to see where there is content is the same in both places.
• Please read WP:Close paraphrasing, that might give you a better idea of what makes copyright violations. There have been issues
• Some sources that you've been using cannot be used a sources, like Wikipedia and FindaGrave, both of which are user-generated content.

–CaroleHenson (talk) 10:02, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Elisa.rolle, For the Yale University Bulletin obit that was printed in FindaGrave, I'll look to see if I can find the original source.–CaroleHenson (talk) 10:13, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Elisa.rolle, Here's the link to the Yale University Bulletin - Bowen's obit is on pages 7-8.–CaroleHenson (talk) 10:21, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

CaroleHenson, in the meantime I wiil replace the content from the Bulletin as Public Domain and there is no more reference to Find a Grave or Wikipedia. For the father I added the reference to Roseland Cottage, which is in the National Register of Historic Places, and added that references as well. Is it enough for now? Unfortunately the copyvio report remain high, cause it's the Historical New England which has a copy and paste of the Public Domain Bulletin. Rephrasing it is almost impossible since it's a list of point, with now much info aside name and date. I can make them a bullet list, but I do not like this idea. --Elisa.rolle (talk) 10:24, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the updates. I'll look through this now one-by-one and summarize what I find here.–CaroleHenson (talk) 10:33, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Elisa.rolle, Here's a summary of what I am seeing:

• Bulletin of Yale University - does not have a copyright notice within the document that I could find. (As an FYI, it shows up as 0% on the copyvio report because it doesn't compare pdf reports)
• Historic New England - is a copyrighted page - please look at the copyvio report here and if you haven't read it yet close paraphrasing. The report highlights in pink-red where the content is the same in both sources. You want to be particularly careful to paraphrase language like "Lewis Tappan was a passionate voice in the abolition movement".
• National Park Service - these items are not copyrighted. (As an FYI, That doesn't meant that everything by the National Park Service site is in the public domain, only where the government is the author. And, books may have a copyright, like the one used for the Bernheimer Building.)
• About Us - Yale University - this is a copyrighted page - it's a complete copy of the sentence on the page and needs to be reworded. See the highlighted text here.
• Victoria and Albert Museum - this is a copyrighted page - there's a part of the sentence that can be paraphrased here
• National Gallery of Art - this is a copyrighted page - nothing identified on the copyvio report, yeah!
• American Antiquarian Society - I don't see a copyright on the page, but the website is copyrighted. On the FAQ page it says "Readers assume all responsibility for observing the legal requirements of copyright." - The content in the article came from a pdf file and should be paraphrased.
• The Online Books Page is a list of publications

For what it's worth, I had close paraphrasing issues when I first started writing WP articles.

I saw the postings on your talk page where you mentioned this issue and that writing English is difficult. I'll paraphrase these items. The advice about drafting the article first as an WP:AfC is a great one if you want to write an article.–CaroleHenson (talk) 11:28, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

I did some more rephrasing; please notice that the violation report highlights as violation the sentence "The history of the Centennial celebration of the inauguration of George Washington as first president of the United States", which is the title of the book he wrote... it's quite impossible to rephase it. Moreover if I have copyright issue with sentence like "He was born on..." that is quite a problem to rephrase it. --Elisa.rolle (talk) 11:30, 7 April 2017

(UTC)

Cool!

No, you ignore items in quotes (as long as there aren't too many of them), book titles, long occupation titles.–CaroleHenson (talk) 11:36, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Edits - paren was in the wrong place.–CaroleHenson (talk) 12:39, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Summary:

• Bulletin of Yale University: ok
• Historic New England: changed most of them, see my comment above report highlights as violation the sentence "The history of the Centennial celebration of the inauguration of George Washington as first president of the United States", which is the title of the book he wrote.
• National Park Service: ok
• About Us - Yale University: changed
• Victoria and Albert Museum: changed
• National Gallery of Art: ok
• American Antiquarian Society: actually I'm quoting the obituary from 1936 (copyright expired in 2006) and I quoted and then put the link to the pdf. Removed the additional sentence, but the quote is from public domain content and on their website they say "Readers assume all responsibility for observing the legal requirements of copyright."
• The Online Books Page: ok --Elisa.rolle (talk) 11:38, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

I did some additional paraphrasing and I think we're good to go. There's only so much that could be done with his employment info, but see this edit. This is an example where there were better opportunities to paraphrase about the Victoria and Albert Museum information. Sometimes, only so much can be done - like change order like this. I think we're good and I'll submit a request to hide the versions with copyright issues.–CaroleHenson (talk) 12:23, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

I missed one, Elisa.rolle. Here's a good example about how changing the order is needed to paraphrase the sentence. There's an issue if the words (or synonms) are in the same order as the original sentence.[1].–CaroleHenson (talk) 12:35, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

CaroleHenson, thank you. Why the copyright deletion notice is back on the page? should I do something? --Elisa.rolle (talk) 12:39, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Elisa.rolle No, this isn't a deletion notice. It's to hide the versions with copyright issues from view... like the other articles that I paraphrased or the other one we worked on together. The article will remain, but if someone goes into history they won't be able to see the earlier versions. For example, see the history Joseph A. Loftus (another one I worked on). We're done now with the articles you created.–CaroleHenson (talk) 12:50, 7 April 2017 (UTC)