Talk:Thiruvalluvar Statue

Untitled

Where exactly is the copy vio ? Removing citations is vandalism. Lotlil 01:51, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

The source has released the content on GFDL. See here. I still dont see where the copy vio is. Lotlil 02:51, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

This was the source and it says "Copyright © 1979-2007 Himalayan Academy. All rights reserved.". What are you talking about? Sarvagnya 02:50, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

And even if it is released under GFDL, the GFDL disclaimer has to be on every page of the site. If you havent noticed, every page on wikipedia has the GFDL disclaimer. And in any case, the particular page in question says it is copyrighted to himalayanacademy. Sarvagnya 02:56, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

See their explicit cpright msg. It says:

Such image or text may be released for use on Wikipedia under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) and when thus posted on Wikipedia follows the terms of the GFDL. Lotlil 02:55, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Another thing is Wikipedia doesnt entertain "use it on wikipedia all you want but not anywhere else" contributions. With pics, there is something called fair use but with text there is no such thing. Sarvagnya 02:58, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

It's still not clear that this is in violation of policy, but even assuming so, you should've only removed whatever material was taken from that site. Removing my edits, made to add relevant citations in other parts of the article, was nothing short of disruptive. Lotlil 03:13, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Lotlil, don't see a violation of policy. To overcome the issue though, would a written agreement by the source (himalayan academy) relieve your concerns? Anantashakti 18:51, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

How difficult is it to simply paraphrase that material? It shouldnt take you more than 10 mins to do it? Why dont u just paraphrase it and save us all some trouble? Sarvagnya 20:31, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Anantashakti, I think paraphrasing the material is a good suggestion. I asked for clarification about the copyright issue here and the message I got is that the website's licensing is not very clear. So, the best way to use their text is to summarise the content in our own words. I would've done that myself, but it may be a long time before I get around to doing it. Lotlil 18:18, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Paraphrasing the material sounds like a good idea. I do have copyright permission from the himalayan academy (please see HA user page), so will leave the original source as a citation. Anantashakti 21:03, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, there's also the question of reliability. I don't know if it's a concern in this case, but you may want to read the wiki policy on reliable sources and evaluate the reliability of the source. Lotlil 23:21, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes and i was coming to that. Can somebody establish the RS credentials of this source? Anyway, I'm not going to lose much sleep about it as this is neither a controversial nor scholarly article. Sarvagnya 23:27, 28 July 2007 (UTC)