User talk:Art History 1

The text comes from the website of the Florence Griswold Museum, which has agreed (under the terms of GFDL) to allow publication of its text on another website. Copyright permission was emailed from the museum to Wikimedia on September 5, 2008. Art History 1

Bruce crane
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Bruce crane, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.florencegriswoldmuseum.org/learning/insitu/html/south/crane.php. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 15:25, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Permission, Bruce crane
Hi. I'm not sure if you have seen my response to your question at the copyright problems talk page, but since time has past and this situation remains unresolved, I wanted to follow up with you here. At this point, if you have not already done so, I would definitely resend that e-mail. Please be sure to include the URL of the source article as well as a clear indicator of the title of the article on Wikipedia. Please make sure that your permission covers all necessary points: it must come from an e-mail address associated with the site, and it must irrevocably release the material into public domain or under GFDL (which allows both commercial and non-commercial reuse, as well as modification). (See Declaration of consent for all enquiries for a template letter.)

I'm sorry for the delay here. Like many large entities, Wikimedia is compartmentalized, which can create communication problems. Usually, e-mails processed through the Communications Committee are handled swiftly and these matters quickly resolved, but when there are problems there is no particular "point" person who may be contacted about them. I'm sorry that I can't follow up on this for you myself. Resending is the best advice I have to offer.

If the permission letter is not received and verified in a timely fashion, the article may need to be temporarily deleted pending the completion of that process. Please don't be alarmed if this happens. Undoing the deletion is as simple as flipping a switch, and on those rare occasions when the permission process is prolonged, articles are restored when the matter is finalized.

If you do resend the letter, please make a note at the article's talk page that you have done so, as this may help other administrators in determining that further delay is appropriate here.

Thank you, and if you have any questions about this, please feel free to contact me at my talk page. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:05, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Copyright problem follow-up: Bruce crane
Dear Art History 1:

Since we do not yet have verification of permission by the processes set out above, the article has been deleted. As I indicate above, this deletion is not necessarily permanent. If you have already re-sent your letter to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, the article will be restored when that letter is received and processed by the Communications Committee. Likewise, if you have not yet re-sent you letter, you may certainly do so at any point, and the article will be restored when that letter is received and processed.

As Wikipedia does not require proof of identity on account creation, it is essential that we receive external proof of authorization in order to ensure that we remain compliant with US Copyright law. It is also essential that we verify that copyright holders understand the extent of the release they are authorizing, in that GNU Free documentation license permits modification and reuse in any forum, even commercial publication, as long as authorship credit is maintained.

If you have questions about the verification procedure or about this situation, please feel free to contact me at my talk page. Thank you.--Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:47, 21 September 2008 (UTC)