Talk:International School of Riga

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. 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, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their 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. for (talk)  12:37, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * The text has now been released under appropriate free licenses for use on Wikipedia (and elsewhere) through OTRS. I hope won't mind that I undid the revision deletion in light of that (which was absolutely an appropriate action at the time). Feel free to incorporate any of the free text into the article (either by reverting to past versions where appropriate or finding new text to improve the article, if you care to do so. Cheers. ~ Rob 13 Talk 05:22, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads-up . The OTRS may clear the copyright issues. In fact it also signals that the school (let's not forget, a business) is keen for wikipedia to reuse the text from their handbook, not that the material meets any of the other criteria for WP:NPOV, WP:V, WP:RS. The author's WP:COI still remains an issue for me, and I have no intention of assisting Isrpaterson in their job of promoting their employer. for (talk)  06:55, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I certainly wasn't implying you should introduce promotional language, just that the text is available. Obviously, I can't comment on the contents of the OTRS ticket in any way, but I'm generally against leaving a possible COI editor to do their thing. Just because an employer wants an article "improved" doesn't mean it couldn't actually use some improving (whether or not that involves using the text). ~ Rob 13 Talk 07:08, 31 July 2016 (UTC)