Talk:Phoenix Declaration

Text
Any reason that the whole thing is written out here? - Haymaker (talk) 00:37, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Dunno, I'm still a relative noob. I see some declarations/documents with their full text, others with summaries, others with external links. DTinAZ (talk) 16:05, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It seems pretty unnecessary and its counter-part doesn't have it. - Haymaker (talk) 13:41, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * By "counter-part," are you referring to the "Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience"? If so, the the obvious answer is that it is much, much longer and it has a self-summary available to publish. The Phoenix Declaration is very short.
 * Upon reviewing recent edits (prior to the Copyvio tagging), I see that someone who didn't bother to join this discussion blanked out the text, so now that the Copyvio is no longer an issue, I have restored the text. Other declarations/documents do indeed appear on WP with their full text and this particular one is very brief. Let's give this a rest now, please? DTinAZ (talk) 23:11, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

DTinAZ (talk) 14:14, 13 August 2011 (UTC) I'm sorry, but it is very hard to see the most recent flurry of revisions (starting 1 February 2012) as anything but an edit war between people who stalk each other around WP and do this out of spite, but I will try my best to assume good faith and deal with the potential copyright issue in keeping with WP policies. I'll take care of this, but am genuinely annoyed. DTinAZ (talk) 15:40, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * While I don't believe it's necessary to release the text (brief excerpts from the document in an article on the document itself qualify as fair use), you can look at WP:Donating copyrighted materials if you want to learn about how to grant Wikipedia permission to use the text. Note that because all Wikipedia text is under a Creative Commons license, you can't release the text just to Wikipedia, and you may find it more efficient to put a CC license on your website itself. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 17:43, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Notice: As per the provisions found at Donating copyrighted materials, a Wikipedia-compatible copyleft notice has been placed on the source page and I am utilizing the Text release template as proof that the material in question is no longer being protected by copyright. DTinAZ (talk) 23:17, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Very nice, thank you. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 01:36, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

I see that the editor who apparently chooses not to discuss his contrary rationale here has once again removed a large portion of the quoted document, commenting (rudely, BTW) "we do not store entire documents here per WP:LONGQUOTE--this is NOT WikiQuote." WP:LONGQUOTE is from a "guidance essay," and is "not a Wikipedia policy or guideline." Speaking of quotes, "I'll be back." DTinAZ (talk) 08:56, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Back already. Just a few examples of documents with their full text quoted on WP: Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Proclamation of Independence of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, Declaration of Independence of the Mexican Empire. Will the editor in question be visiting those pages, and many others like them, to remove the storage of entire documents on WP? (Assuming good faith, one would think so.) It is germane to point out that the Do not include copies of primary sources guideline link actually redirects to Do not include the full text of lengthy primary sources, the key word being "lengthy." IMO, the full text of the document at hand is relatively brief, but I won't revert the removal of much of the document just yet, and ask Roscelese not to to so as well. I have a different strategy in mind. DTinAZ (talk) 09:26, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Even though your argument falls under WP:OTHERSTUFF, yes, I will be tagging them copy to Wikisource. The regular editors will be given reasonable time to summarize the texts and then I will move the texts to WikiSource and delete them from the articles. – Lionel (talk) 11:49, 6 February 2012 (UTC)