Talk:S. A. Stepanek

Copyvio
a long blockquote (212 words) is not a copyright vio. but by all means edit the article if you truly feel that way. Pohick2 (talk) 18:05, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The substantial block of text is a copyright violation and has been deleted. If you wish to use copyrighted text than you must obtain permission through one of the methods outlined at WP:DCM. — Cactus Writer |   needles  21:10, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Permission to use quoted review
'''The Editors at DIAGRAM have no problem with the use of that quote under fair use rules.

Cheers!

Pablo Peschiera'''

''On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:51 PM,  wrote:

I like your review of S.A. Stepanek, here: http://www.webdelsol.com/DIAGRAM/6_5/rev_stepanek.html i incorporated a quote in the wikipedia article that i wrote here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.A._Stepanek can i have your permission to use this content under fair use? thanks'' Pohick2 (talk) 12:48, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * > Subject: Re: [Ticket#2009082610004756] review of
 * > Thank you for your email.
 * > A person cannot give permission to use text under fair use. As far as Wikipedia is
 * > concerned, either they give permission under CC-BY-SA-3.0 or not at all.
 * > See also , including this quote:
 * > "Articles may in accordance with the guideline use brief verbatim textual excerpts
 * > from copyrighted media, properly attributed or cited to its original source or
 * > author."
 * > Yours sincerely,
 * > Joe Daly
 * form over substance - a person can agree that their copyrighted work can be used under a fair use rubric. we disagree that the 200 word blockquote was brief, or not.  the word count is not definitive, the percentage of the total is low.  copyright is a gray area not subject to bot calculations. there must be harm done, by quoting and linking, the value of the original is if anything enhanced.  Pohick2 (talk) 23:17, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * > Yours sincerely,
 * > Joe Daly
 * form over substance - a person can agree that their copyrighted work can be used under a fair use rubric. we disagree that the 200 word blockquote was brief, or not.  the word count is not definitive, the percentage of the total is low.  copyright is a gray area not subject to bot calculations. there must be harm done, by quoting and linking, the value of the original is if anything enhanced.  Pohick2 (talk) 23:17, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

notable
notable per review and award. Pohick2 (talk) 00:45, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://www.legacy.com/obituaries/statesmanjournal/obituary.aspx?n=sally-anna-stepanek-cox&pid=194128923&fhid=7982. 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. – Levivich 22:42, 12 October 2019 (UTC)