Talk:Arachne (archaeological database)

	Books portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bibliographies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bibliographies 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.BibliographiesWikipedia:WikiProject BibliographiesTemplate:WikiProject BibliographiesBibliographies articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Science Taskforce (assessed as Mid-importance).

Databases (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Databases, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.DatabasesWikipedia:WikiProject DatabasesTemplate:WikiProject DatabasesDatabases articles

The content of this article has been derived in whole or part from http://arachne.uni-koeln.de/drupal/?q=de_DE/node/186. Permission has been received from the copyright holder to release this material under both the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported license and the GNU Free Documentation License. You may use either or both licenses. Evidence of this has been confirmed and stored by VRT volunteers, under ticket number 2016021710016392.
This template is used by approved volunteers dealing with the Wikimedia volunteer response team system (VRTS) after receipt of a clear statement of permission at permissions-enwikimedia.org. Do not use this template to claim permission.

Close paraphrasing

See: http://csanet.org/newsletter/spring07/nls0703.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwoodger (talk • contribs) 13:37, 6 September 2009‎ (UTC)[reply]

Close paraphrasing: the basic Wikipedia-article is indeed close to the source that is quoted here. But over time additions and updates do get into the Wikipedia-article while the quoted source remains as it is. Therefore the resemblance between both is declining. I did some updates over time, and will continue to do so. Furthermore I have to say that in the beginning I could hardly find the time or the words to say the same one thing in english in two ways: one time for the article and one time for the Wikipedia-article. I think that it is really a question of the viewpoint to mark this as close paraphrasing. In my view this would only be right if the Wikipedia-article would have never been changed by me. But this is up to you. Foertsch (talk) 21:32, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Given your response I think it is more of a conflict of interest issue. Independent sources need to be found for this material. RockMagnetist (talk) 06:34, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Arachne (archaeological database). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:04, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]