Jmcium

Copyright problems with Turk Mason Localari

Hello. Concerning your contribution, Turk Mason Localari, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.mason.org.tr/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=13&Itemid=27. As a copyright violation, Turk Mason Localari appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Turk Mason Localari has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:

• If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Turk Mason Localari and send an email with the message to permissions-enwikimedia.org. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at Talk:Turk Mason Localari with a link to where we can find that note.
• If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Turk Mason Localari.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:01, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Descendants of Prince Ludwig von Anhalt-Zerbst

The article Descendants of Prince Ludwig von Anhalt-Zerbst has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The only "reference" is to a web page which has the same text as this. Either that is a copy of this Wikipedia article, meaning we have no sources, or this is a copy of that, meaning this is a likely copyright violation. In any case that page is not a reliable source.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:10, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: Proposed Deletion of article Descendants of Prince Ludwig von Anhalt-Zerbst

Thank you for the warning that you have clearly explained. I concur that this article is taken from the reference web site. However, this action is executed without copyright violation. As an amateur Anhalt-Zerbst researcher, I have made preliminary correspondence with the reference web site owner. And, I have received clear authorization to display the contents (as-is) of the reference website, and only after getting this authorization I have published this article on Wikipedia. My intention is to share this information which sounds reliable to me with other parties and try to obtain as much contributions as possible and therefore make this article a more fulfilling piece of information. On the other hand, if you deem that my explanation herein is not sufficient, I may forward you the authorization, or you may directy check the validity from the referenced web site. But my aim was sharing a unique information with the wikipedia users. Thank you for your consideration, I remain, with best regards, Joe M. Cameron — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmcium (talk • contribs) 09:36, 5 February 2010

Thank you for your clarification. Unfortunately, since anyone can edit Wikipedia, although you say have copyright permission to the work, we have no way of verifying your statement, so to use any copyrighted text, you need to do one of the following things:

• Have a notice placed on the website you have copied text from stating it "Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify any text on this website under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/> and the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation <http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html>"
• Have someone affiliated with the website (and from an email address on the website) send an email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org containing a declaration of consent identical to the one found at WP:CONSENT (with all the relevant CAPITAL and bold bits changed)

I think, however, that it is only fair to warn you that, even if the copyright problem is cleared up, the article may well be deleted for other reasons. In particular, you need to consider Wikipedia's guidelines on reliable sources. The page you cite as a reference looks rather like a personal web page, and does not appear to satisfy those guidelines. Furthermore, even if you were to provide reliable sources, it is doubtful whether the information would satisfy our notability guideline: the fact of being a descendant of a particular person does not in itself confer sufficient notability to justify being given coverage in an encyclopedia article. I tell you this because I have in the past known inexperienced Wikipedia editors to put a lot of effort into removing copyright infringement, only to find their work deleted for other reasons. I can appreciate how frustrating and disheartening that must be, so I thought it only fair to let you know. You may like to consider this before deciding whether to proceed with any of the suggestions above concerning the copyright issue. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:24, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again for the information and suggestions. I am in the process of getting futher supporting sources for this article. Also, for the copyright authorization issue, I have requested a proper authorization form the affiliated person and from an email address on the website, and I have sent an email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org containing a declaration of consent identical to WP:CONSENT. For your information. And thanks again. Joe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmcium (talk • contribs) 11:43, 6 February 2010

You can remove the proposed deletion notice if you wish to contest the deletion. If you don't do so the deletion will probably take place when the time has run out (2010-02-09 13:09). However, you should be aware that it is still likely that the article will be deleted following an "Article for Deletion" proposal because of lack of evidence of notability, whether or not the copyright issue has been dealt with. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:15, 8 February 2010 (UTC)