Talk:M. E. Aldrich Rope

Contested deletion
This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because... I own the copyright to the material as it is from my own website. The article has already been deleted once by Deb and restored at my request. If you give me time I will try to satisfy you over the copyright issue in the way you prescribe. It is very discouraging to the submitters of new articles if action is taken so fast that there is no time to correct errors highlighted. Do you not want to enrich the scope of Wikipedia? This article is about a significant stained glass artist from a group, many of whom already have Wikipedia articles to their name --Pangapilot (talk) 17:28, 8 May 2015 (UTC)


 * The difference is that they for example have NOT had their contents lifted 100% from another source. Where is your website anyway? Anyhow, you may wish to look at WP:DCM for help, but be advised if "your" website is also infringing another's copyright, then that cannot be overridden. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi  17:34, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

The text on suffolkpainters.co.uk came from my website in the first place. I wrote the article for artbios too! The problem here is that my website http://www.arthur.rope.clara.net has been live since 2001 and over the years has been freely plagiarised by other sites. Now I am being called up for copyright infringement of text which began at my website in the first place!! To be clear: the text on suffolkpainters was derived from my website in the first place: it's all rather ironical! Pangapilot (talk) 17:30, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

My website is www.arthur.rope.clara.net. The material on it is my own work or derived from research. Will all this palaver be avoided is I simply paraphrase my own material?Pangapilot (talk) 17:41, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm not keen on the "quotation marks" on "your". I am Arthur Rope and my website is my website without quotations. I find the tone of all this intervention rather too strongPangapilot (talk) 17:44, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

I am working on trying to satisfy Deb's comments and would appreciate some time - days, not minutes, please Pangapilot (talk) 17:57, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
 * See "I own the source, or work for the owner of the source, can I copy it to Wikipedia?". So I would suggest not- far better to 're-write' the article, using, of course, any knowledge available to you, but using the original sources rather than that website. Read the notes on close paraphrasing, and why it is not encouraged.I moved the article into your user space, but someone else will doubtless point out that as your user-space is still viewable, so is the illegal material- so should still be removed speedily. As another section says:
 * Can I copy and paste text into a user page or talk page in order to work on it?... No. Wikipedia cannot host copyrighted material anywhere, not even in talk or user pages, not even temporarily
 * A total re-write calls. PS. As you might have gathered WP takes copyright very seriously; hence the strength of my intervention. And it appears that you may wish to read up on another Wiki policy too while you're there- that of conflict of interest; i.e., being personally close to the subject. Best of luck with it though!Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi  19:02, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your assistance. I'm rewriting and improving as guided. I cannot emphasise enough that apart from myself and Peter Cormack (who I reference), there is no-one writing about this artist and yet her works are spread worldwide. All the text derives from his or my research. Someone has to do an article on her and I am stepping forward. If after full publication other users feel it is inappropriately phrased I imagine they will edit accordingly. You still refer to illegal material but I strongly assert that there is nothing illegal here from the copyright angle.Pangapilot (talk) 20:24, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

You will notice that the text is now pared down even further to avoid the slightest hint of copyright issues. Much information has been removed but if that is the price that must be paid, so be it. WP is the poorer, I'd say Pangapilot (talk) 21:14, 8 May 2015 (UTC)