Talk:Conflict archaeology

External link
Rfebris states that the link is to a document that violates copyright. Roxy the dog says "Copyright holder has no rights over weblinks", but per WP:LINKVIO it is against policy to link to pages that violate copyright. In any case, a single paper on one narrow example of conflict archaeology isn't a great loss to an article on the disciple as a whole. Removing. ascorbic (talk) 07:55, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid your interpretation of WP:LINKVIO doesn't apply here. Rfebris DID NOT state that the document violates copyright, and in fact the document does not violate copyright. As I have already stated a copyright holder has no control or rights over weblinks, and in this case copyright probably belongs to the University that commissioned the work. I will therefore restore the deleted content. (Perhaps a case could be made to remove the link via WP:UNDUE ascorbic, but I suggest the content of the link is central to the subject of the article) -Roxy the dog™ (resonate) 09:20, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

I am the author and I have the copyright in this work, not the University. I have not given permission for me work to be used in this manner as I reserve the right to be published elsewhere. It needs to be taken down. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rfebris (talk • contribs) 10:35, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Commenting here after the author of the dissertation emailed OTRS (Ticket#2014100110008981). This link violates the external links policy on several levels: firstly, since we have reason to believe that the site is hosting the content illegally, we shoudl not link to it per WP:ELNEVER, and secondly, a dissertation that has not yet been published in a peer-reviewed journal is considered unverifiable research, and therefore fails point 2 of WP:ELNO. I am re-removing the link, Roxy, kindly do not put it back again. Yunshui 雲 水 13:06, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * It is a pity that both the author and the OTRS volunteer misunderstand the nature of copyright. However, if the dissertation is considered unverifiable, I hope nobody tells the uni, as they might give the paper a bad grade. I sincerely hope not. Both of you should remember that a copyright holder does not control what links to said copyright work on the internet. This encyclopaedia would be in terrible trouble if they did - think about it. Point 2 of wp:elno doesn't say what you say it says either, but I accept that this dissertation may be being hosted illegally (wp:elnever) on the Toblerone Trail website and so I wont be replacing the link in the article. BTW, there are a number of links to the .pdf out there on teh internetz that you may wish to track down. -Roxy the dog™ (resonate) 13:44, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Apparently it has now been legitimately published at - the author has no problem with this link being added instead, if you wish. By the way, I think you may be right about my reading of ELNO#2, so please disregard that as a reason for removal. Yunshui 雲 水  07:10, 2 October 2014 (UTC)