Talk:Naïve realism (psychology)

Expanding Stub
Hi, all. I wanted to give a heads up that as part of the WikiProject Psychology, I will be working to expand this page over the next few weeks by adding in sources, background and theory. Mcooperwhite (talk) 06:22, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Copyright issue
I would like to have a discussion regarding the copyright issue on this page. The copyrighted text has been on the page since it was first created in 2012. While expanding the stub, I left it in (in block quotes and with attribution) under these copyright assumptions from Wikipedia: "Brief quotations of copyrighted text may be used to illustrate a point, establish context, or attribute a point of view or idea. In all cases, an inline citation following the quote or the sentence where it is used is required. Copyrighted text that is used verbatim must be attributed with quotation marks or other standard notation, such as block quotes. Any alterations must be clearly marked, i.e., [brackets] for added text, an ellipsis (...) for removed text, and emphasis noted after the quotation as "(emphasis added)" or "(emphasis in the original)".

I am happy to change the text, if need be, but would like to know what editors think is the best way to proceed. Thanks! Mcooperwhite (talk) 18:59, 2 December 2015 (UTC)


 * You're quite right - this quote was there long before you edited the article. It began as an overly-long quotation which gradually lost its quote box. I removed it, and hopefully between the edits to the article and the discussion here, we don't need to fiddle with the article history. is that ok with you?
 * Moving forward, Mcooperwhite, I would recommend that if you want those "tenets" in that article that you re-write the information therein in your own words, being careful to avoid close paraphrasing. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:52, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, there is nothing sacred about the wording and it should be recast; as it stood the text was too long to justify a quote. With regard to the text in question being on the page since 2012, often on Wikipedia problems of copyright only come to light when the article is nominated for promotion as was the case here. On this note, it is considered bad form to nominate an article at FAC and not respond quickly to reviewers' concerns. I suggest that the FAC nomination is withdrawn as premature, and we concentrate on eradicating the copyvio and other potential close-paraphrasing from the article.  please do take this personally, and I thank you for all the work you done to improve the article. Lastly, it is not possible to "fiddle with the article history"; it will be there for as least as long as Wikipedia is around. Personally, I would love to see the Tenets re-written in a language that is easier for a lay person to understand. I know from experience that this is rife with difficulties; but please have a go. Best wishes. Graham Beards (talk) 22:31, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Moving forward, I will re-write the information about the "tenets," as discussed, in a way that is more accessible (and is not close paraphrasing). Also, I have withdrawn the FAC nomination for now. Thank you, and ! Mcooperwhite (talk) 02:02, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Article has been updated with assumptions. Some of the text has been rewritten in a more encyclopedic tone. Section about hostile media effect has been reworded. New version of article submitted for GAN.Mcooperwhite (talk) 05:24, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://web.mit.edu/curhan/www/docs/Articles/15341_Readings/Negotiation_and_Conflict_Management/Ross_Ward_Naive_Realism.pdf. 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. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:43, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
 * If I'm wrong in thinking that this has been fully dealt with now, please ping me here. Thanks to those who recognised and addressed the problem! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:43, 22 January 2016 (UTC)