Talk:George Bourne

Untitled

Very suspicious. It is an extremely long article created in a single post and is completely unlinked. There are lots of quotations, but it's not always clear if a person is being quoted or if the poster is attributing the text to someone else. -- Kjkolb 11:37, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

It seems to be from an out of copyright 1882 text, which is consistent with the writing style. [1] __ Brianhe (talk) 03:58, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

I've removed the copyright concern flag. This article is clearly a more-or-less exact copy of:

• "George Bourne, The Pioneer of American Antislavery". The Methodist Quarterly Review. Vol.42. Pp.68-90. G. Lane & P. P. Sanford. 1882.

But as Brianhe points out, this is no longer copyrighted material and is in the public domain now. As such the problem is not one of copyright violation, but rather WP:PLAGIARISM violation. The text should be removed if it cannot be reworded and summarized properly. -Thibbs (talk) 18:33, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

On more careful consideration and in consultation with User:Ruslik0, I've realized that even though this reflects verbatim copying, it doesn't violate plagiarism provided that it is properly attributed using attribution templates. It seems like a poor strategy for article-writing to me, but it looks like it's OK according to the rules. I'll add the appropriate attribution templates tonight. -Thibbs (talk) 19:41, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

OK. I've now added the "source attribution" tag which places this article into Category:Source attribution - a collection of articles that copy verbatim from out-of-copyright works. As I said earlier, I think it would be good to reword the article if possible, but for now this is a good half-measure. Per Wikipedia:PLAGIARISM#Public-domain sources, this template should not be removed unless no part of the original source language is left in the article. -Thibbs (talk) 03:06, 27 February 2013 (UTC)