Talk:Stamford bull run

Lincolnshire Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lincolnshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lincolnshire 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.LincolnshireWikipedia:WikiProject LincolnshireTemplate:WikiProject LincolnshireLincolnshire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

England Low‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Animal rights Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animal rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of animal rights 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.Animal rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Animal rightsTemplate:WikiProject Animal rightsAnimal rights articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Text and/or other creative content from Stamford, Lincolnshire was copied or moved into Stamford Bull Run with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Copyright investigation edit

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This article was flagged for resemblance to external sites, including http://ourheritagelincolnshire.weebly.com/stamford.html. Investigation shows it was created as an unattributed split from Stamford, Lincolnshire, where the content was introduced to Wikipedia in 2009. This appears to be a backwards copy- explanation placed at the top of the original article's talk page.

The unattributed split is itself a copyright problem. Content on Wikipedia is not public domain, but is liberally licensed for reuse. However, reusing it without meeting the terms of the license is not authorized. I have repaired this instance. Please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia for more information.

The article also included a lengthy, bald quotation from an external, copyrighted source. Wikipedia does accept quotations, but these must be brief and used transformatively - not simply because we wish to include the information. When information comes from a copyrighted source, or from a source we cannot verify is free licensed or public domain, we should put it in our own words aside from brief and clearly marked quotations used for good reasons, such as those set out at Wikipedia:Non-free content policy and guideline. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:58, 25 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

Add topic