Talk:Noah Raby

Possible 'Copyvio'
The 'story' is relevant to the article, and it could be easily cited as a source and re-worked. Mass deletion is NOT the answer.Ryoung122 02:38, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

The use of the information on this page should be legal under the 'fair use' doctrine. The material is being used for scholarly or nonprofit purposes and is pertinent to the article. In addition, the material was cited as the source.Ryoung122 02:45, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Copyvio is never the answer, and when text is copied word-for-word from another source without permission, mass deletion is always the correct answer. Fair use only applies when there is no copyright-free alternative. In this case, you could easily rewrite the text in your own words, such that there would be no copyright issues, and then there'd be no problems with it at all. --Maelwys 11:38, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

As a 'detective,' however, I look for clues in what others say. If I say it, then how can I find clues?Ryoung122 06:36, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Presumably, you're not doing any further 'detective' work based on the wikipedia article that you're writing, you can do that based on the original source. The original source is still linked from the page, and anybody can go read that if they want to see what it says in the original wording. But the article itself cannot contain any copyrighted text, which that is. --Maelwys 12:04, 15 September 2007 (UTC)