Talk:International Citizen Service
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
Untitled[edit]
New contributor
1) Copyright infringement - The content on this new page is public domain. It is derived from an official UK Government press release so it is not in breach of copyright. http://www.dfid.gov.uk/Media-Room/Press-releases/2011/Young-people-to-make-a-difference-to-the-worlds-poorest-International-Citizen-Service-opens/.
2) The VWBot has performed a web search with the contents of this page, and it appears to include material copied directly from: http://www.progressio.org.uk/blog/news/young-people-faith-make-difference-worlds-poorest-ics-empower-opens
The content on this (Progressio) page includes some of the information from the same official UK Government press release. Hence it is similar.
Woolfp (talk) 14:09, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
- USA Government stuff is public domain - I don't think the same applies in the UK. Look at http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/copyright/p01_uk_copyright_law. You are safer putting it in your own words anyway. Peridon (talk) 14:33, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
DFID website says all info, presumably including press releases, is copyright free SEE © Crown copyright 2011 You may use and re-use the information featured on this website (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. http://www.dfid.gov.uk/About-DFID/Terms-and-Conditions/
Woolfp (talk) 16:07, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
- In this case I believe it's not public domain but released under an acceptable license the OGL (which is why we have Template:OGL-text. The terms and conditions for the website clearly state it's released under the OGL so I don't think we have a copyright problem (at least not if we attribute it properly which I'll do it's not speedied). Dpmuk (talk) 16:23, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
- Should also add that it is NOT copyright free. The page clearly states it's crown copyright - they do however allow it's use under a license that is acceptable to us. Dpmuk (talk) 16:24, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
- So I declined the speedy deletion since there's at least one news report (repeated variously through a few different newspapers) from last year which talks about the project. There are some more recent articles but they read more like press releases, so it may still not be notable yet. I also added the OGL attribution, so that's all set. Cheers! VernoWhitney (talk) 18:27, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Article seems biased considering it is lifted from an official UK government press release. I have added criticisms of the scheme for balance.Zinedine Socrates (talk) 13:57, 4 March 2015 (UTC)