Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Worsthorne
Same author as Parco dei Principe. Seems likely copyvio: http://www.lancstowns.co.uk/worsthorne.htm Niteowlneils 18:31, 2 May 2004 (UTC)
- Their copyright license [1] is relatively free, but places a non-commercial restriction on the material. Delete. -- Cyrius|✎ 20:00, May 2, 2004 (UTC)
- Comment. FWIW, the original/only contributor to the article has removed the VfD text with the comment "Deleted pointless information". Niteowlneils 21:32, 2 May 2004 (UTC)
- Comment. I restored it, since it was still a copyvio if the copyright isn't appropriate, plus the edit removed the VfD header. If this is a copyvio, it should be listed on Wikipedia:Copyright problems. RickK 21:52, 2 May 2004 (UTC)
- I think in the strictest terms, it's not a copyvio, because their license gives us permission to use it. We'd only be vioing their copy if we distributed it for-profit. However, their license is incompatible with the GFDL, so we can't use it because of our own self-imposed restrictions. Does Wikipedia:Copyright problems handle that problem? -- Cyrius|✎ 00:32, May 3, 2004 (UTC)
- I think so. RickK 03:02, 3 May 2004 (UTC)
- I think in the strictest terms, it's not a copyvio, because their license gives us permission to use it. We'd only be vioing their copy if we distributed it for-profit. However, their license is incompatible with the GFDL, so we can't use it because of our own self-imposed restrictions. Does Wikipedia:Copyright problems handle that problem? -- Cyrius|✎ 00:32, May 3, 2004 (UTC)
- Comment. I restored it, since it was still a copyvio if the copyright isn't appropriate, plus the edit removed the VfD header. If this is a copyvio, it should be listed on Wikipedia:Copyright problems. RickK 21:52, 2 May 2004 (UTC)
- Keep, if not copyvio. Alcarillo 16:01, 3 May 2004 (UTC)
- Seems like a copyvio; the terms of use don't seem compatible with GFDL. Try to resolve copyright issue, if not a problem then keep it, otherwise delete. Wile E. Heresiarch 04:32, 5 May 2004 (UTC)