Talk:List of New York State Historic Markers

size and source
This page has the potential of becoming really, really huge. Should it be broken up now, of should we wait for more entries? -R.
 * I'd say not yet. It's still not even 30 kilobytes, which is the rule of thumb for WP:SPLIT.--MrFishGo Fish 20:05, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree that it should not be split unless it does become larger. --Igoldste (talk) 01:59, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

What is the source for all this?--MrFishGo Fish 20:01, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I walked around my town and just photographed the sign that I saw. --Igoldste (talk) 01:59, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

copyright violation issues
Recent development of this list-article added pasted-in copies of text of historic markers into split-out county list-articles. The previous version of this article already had some text copied in. This is all in violation of copyright law. Text of historic plaques is copyrighted in general. Note, state government documents and writing is not public domain, while U.S. Federal documents usually are. If someone could obtain release into the public domain of all of the text, by New York State, then there would be no problem.

I do see a role for a list-article (or county-split-off sublists) that identifies the topics of historic markers and gives coordinates of where they are located, for display in linked Google/LiveSearch maps. But currently this list-article is all about being a big copyright violation. doncram (talk) 18:28, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Further, note that the Flickr-posted photos of historic plaques here cannot be used in wikipedia. As images of text that is copyrighted, they are not public domain. It is okay to include an external link from wikipedia to that Flickr group, I guess, but wikipedia's standards are higher and including individual images of historic plaques directly into wikipedia is not acceptable. Unless there is explicit permission granted by New York State (or other copyright holder) using the wp:OTRS system to allow the photos and/or the text into the public domain. doncram (talk) 18:33, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I disagree. Reprinting the inscriptions and posting photos of the plaques is in keeping with the purpose of the plaques themselves - to increase interest in, and education about, local history. Absolutely no one is complaining; if anything, the respective curators and historical societies would be happy to know their work is on Wikipedia, and that photographers are making the effort to find these spots. I think this is a solution in search of a problem. Kafziel Complaint Department 18:39, 17 May 2009 (UTC)


 * From previous experience, I know that photos of plaques will get deleted on copyright violation grounds. In several copyvio discussions a year or two ago leading to deletions of plaque photos, where i was on the side of keeping them, I stated arguments a lot like yours, in fact worded almost exactly the same.  It turns out there is "freedom of panorama" in copyright law for the U.S., which allows us to take pics of buildings but, oddly, not of public art like sculptures, and also not of text that is copyrighted.  It is better to make it clear to you and others sooner rather than later, that Commons and wikipedia administrative forces will be crushing in their application of copyright law.  I don't want you and others engaging in taking and uploading a lot of photos that will then be deleted.  The issue of the copyright text is opened by me, anyhow, with wikipedia copyright people, at Copyright problems/2009 May 17.  On the other hand, for a focused list like this one, perhaps one contact to the appropriate New York State office, with the assistance of OTRS editors like User:Howcheng, might lead to a state-wide "solution" allowing photos.  That would be best.  For now, lower your expectations that any text or photos will be kept. doncram (talk) 19:23, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * So you lost one argument, and have completely switched your stance? Argument for argument's sake? I'd wager that, for a large number of those plaques, nobody even knows who the copyright holder is. It's not New York State; most of them were paid for and written by private citizens and no records were kept. If a specific copyright holder has a legitimate complaint about the photos or the content, they can go through OTRS. We don't need to beat them to the punch. I'm all for copyright protection - as an admin, I've spent quite a bit of time deleting copyvios and blocking persistent violators - but this is one instance in which it will serve only to weaken good articles. A clear case for IAR.
 * I'm certainly not a prolific photographer of historical plaques, so I don't have any great personal stake in this. But if you want to start crusading against your own position just for lack of something better to do, I'm not playing that game. Kafziel Complaint Department 20:38, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Let me echo the above comments and ask you to view my comment at Talk:List of New York State Historic Markers in Cortland County, New York. There is a very good chance this text is in the public domain. This is especially true if it was published without copyright notice. As for photos, I can understand that. If we use the di minimis rule, however, a photo of the plaque with the site it represents in the background a) would be more interesting visually, and b) seem to make it possible to make photos with plaques available. I am also suprised Doncram that after all of your amazing contributions, you are going against an effort to broaden peoples knowledge and understanding of historic places. It seems to go against the good work you've done. Inoysterbay (talk) 21:00, 17 May 2009 (UTC)


 * There is complete separation between the topics of what I and we all would "like" to be true (that all historic plaques were public domain, that public art is public domain, etc.) vs. what is copyright law. I value protecting Wikipedia's good name and reputation for copyright compliance, and I value the idea that through wikipedia we put valuable material out there clearly and usefully into the public domain (or into free use under GFDL or other licenses).  I don't particularly sympathisize with those who want to post copyrighted material because it a) "ought" to be public domain, or b) it "might" be public domain, or c) they don't want to go through the work of getting permissions.  It appears to me that a few simple requests need to be put to state agencies, and negotiations need to be carried through, to get them to give permissions.
 * Could someone take the lead on trying to secure New York State permissions? Inoysterbay, one thing you could explain to others how to use the OTRS system, and you could set an example by properly taking care of the Oyster Bay cemetery photo of a plaque which is under copyvio review now at Commons.
 * In the absence of activity and progress in remedying these situations, i think my hands are going to be full in playing the bad cop role, seeing to the deletion of all plaque text and photos. I see it as the right thing to do, to protect wikipedia and to ensure that what historic sites editors do in the future is more valuable to everyone.  You all just have to do the right thing and get the copyright issues resolved properly. doncram (talk) 06:24, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * You're trying to make this out to be a black and white issue, when it most certainly is not. In the absence of any real complaints - real complaints, from copyright holders, not your hypothetical complaints - I don't think it's necessary to force Inoysterbay to jump through all these bureaucratic hoops. I'm not going to fight you on it, but I really think there are better ways to spend your time here. It's a thankless enough job as it is, without getting embroiled in arguments you don't really believe in anyway. There's really nothing to be gained by it. Kafziel Complaint Department 19:39, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Response to Copyright Violation Issues
See my response here: Talk:List of New York State Historic Markers in Cortland County, New York. Text in this article is in the public domain. The work was published without a copyright notice. No copyright mark is included on any of the aforementioned markers. This places them in the public domain because of "failure to comply with formalities."

Even if it can be proven that copyright notice was made, as a work published between 1923 through 1963 it is unclear whether the copyright was renewed or not. In the case the copyright was not renewed, then the work would be in the public domain.

For more information, see . Inoysterbay (talk) 20:00, 17 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I responded somewhat at Talk:List of New York State Historic Markers in Cortland County, New York. This is getting a bit confusing, too many conversations on same matters going, perhaps my fault. doncram (talk) 06:49, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of New York State Historic Markers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130324134704/http://www.nysm.nysed.gov/historicmarkers/ to http://www.nysm.nysed.gov/historicmarkers/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:35, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of New York State Historic Markers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150905155427/http://www.nysm.nysed.gov/services/marker/srvmarker.html to http://www.nysm.nysed.gov/services/marker/srvmarker.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:57, 26 December 2017 (UTC)