Talk:Gulden Draak

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://thebeersessions.com/beers/gulden-draak/. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 21:45, 30 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Drmies.
 * Just because the text is the same does not mean that WE copied from THEM! I don't know where you are getting your information from, but I translated that section of text directly from the Dutch Wikipedia page in early 2008. I remember it distinctly. You can check the version history of the article as well. I don't know how long thebeersession.com has been around, but there is nothing in the Wayback Machine from before 2010. I appreciate your effort and strongly worded warning but in this case it does not apply.
 * However, the text isn't encyclopedic or sourced, so perhaps it shouldn't stay anyway. Please check twice before making accusations of plagiarism. This is very serious.
 * --Daveblack (talk) 22:20, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I think you're right on both counts - the text is not a copyvio, but I'm not sure if it should be included either. I've restored it but someone could challenge it if they really wanted.  Oreo Priest  talk 15:53, 15 May 2013 (UTC)