User talk:ZimZalaBim/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

John Canemaker

Thank you for your additions to the John Canemaker article, greatly extending, and extinguishing its stubbiness! Please re-edit it so that titles of works are enclosed by pairs of single quote pairs. You will find that some of your red empty links become filled. If you write ''Title of a Great Film'', it becomes Title of a Great Film. You can enclose links so that ''[[Little Nemo]]'' becomes Little Nemo. Also, please use ordinary capitalization of people's names. This will help the article to conform to the Wikipedia: Manual of Style. Thanks! Hu 22:18, 2004 Nov 23 (UTC)

Dar Williams

I appreciate your noticing that error in the Dar Williams article. I corrected it using the source you provided. JamesMLane 04:04, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

"Elizabeth Robins"

You created this page and then, a few minutes later, one with the correct title (Elizabeth Robins without quotation marks). Is there a reason to keep this one? If not, I suggest you put a {{delete}} tag on it, noting in the edit summary that the content is now at the correct title, and an admin can speedy-delete it as a duplicate. JamesMLane 16:28, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Actually, on further checking, I think they both need to be deleted or substantially rewritten, because too much is taken verbatim from [1]. Do you have permission from NYU to use the material? If not, it's a copyvio. JamesMLane 16:42, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Yes, I have permission from the Fales Library to post this information (I'm a grad student who worked there), but I can edit it down so there is less similarity, if that is preferred. --michael t zimmer 17:31, Dec 17, 2004 (UTC)

As long as we have permission, it doesn't need to be edited. I think it's only fair to them that we give credit to the source, though. (You'll note many articles that credit the lifting of text from the 1911 Britannica, which is public domain.) In addition, a proper note will prevent someone else from slapping on a copyvio tag and listing it for deletion on that basis. We might follow the Britannic credit model and say at the bottom something like: "This article incorporates text from the ___ (? best way to describe it? the website? the biographical dictionary?) of the Fales Library at New York University, with the Library's permission." JamesMLane 21:25, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Addendum: We also need to make sure of the extent of the Library's permission. "You may use it on Wikipedia" or even "You may use it on Wikipedia or any other non-commercial context, just as long as no one's selling the stuff" isn't good enough. Is the Library on board with releasing the text under the GFDL? There are multiple web sites that grab Wikipedia content because it's so freely (and automatically) licensed. JamesMLane 22:30, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I'm not sure on this - didn't realize it was a major issue. I guess I'll strip the page way down and try to get anwswer from the library administrators. --michael t zimmer 22:47, Dec 17, 2004 (UTC)

Yes, unfortunately, it is a major issue. You can look at Wikipedia:Copyrights for a general view, and see a list of hundreds of suspected copyvios at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. Still, it's a fine article, and I'd hate to see it stripped way down if we could get the OK to use it. If you want help understanding exactly what the Library has to agree to, see Wikipedia:Boilerplate request for permission. JamesMLane 01:32, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.