Talk:Rewari–Rohtak line

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: here and here. 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 according to fair use may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, but only if 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. Diannaa (talk) 21:28, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
 * The content has been restored as the charge copyright violation is simply not true - there was possible paraphrasing as even admitted by this editor. . Paraphrasing cited content with citation is not against any WP rule, guideline or policy. Copyright violations links to WP:PARAPHRASE detailing paraphrasing appropriateness. Specifically WP:PARAPHRASE's WP:LIMITED states:
 * "Close paraphrasing is also permitted when there are only a limited number of ways to say the same thing. This may be the case when there is no reasonable way to avoid using titles and technical term, and may also be the case with simple statements of fact."
 * The sentence that was removed was:
 * "The building of the rail line involved the construction of 75 kilometres (47 mi) of new rail line, 124 bridges over canals, drains and irrigation water courses, 36 level crossings, 32 limited height subways and 4 bridges over roads."
 * The Times of India source states:
 * "124 bridges have been constructed on various canals, drains and small irrigation water courses, 36 level crossings, 32 limited height subways and 4 road over bridges (ROBs) have been constructed."
 * Not only does the sentence removed barely, if at all, qualifies as "paraphrasing" the Times of India source, as per WP:LIMITED, there are a very limited number of ways to convey these statement of facts.
 * (Sorry for the Wikilawyering, but there was plenty of of it used in this block threat.) --Oakshade (talk) 00:00, 2 January 2015 (UTC)