User talk:Paulatadventures

Image copyright problem with Image:101- d hashomwende - hcs.JPG
Thank you for uploading Image:101- d hashomwende - hcs.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 09:17, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Old SA flag 1 recce colours 101 bat colours.JPG
Thank you for uploading Image:Old SA flag 1 recce colours 101 bat colours.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 09:35, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Copyright problem: 101 Battalion
Hello. I'm sorry to say that there seems to be a copyright problem with this article, on which you've worked so hard. It seems that you may have built it on content translation from Beeld an Die SWA Gebiedsmag by P.H.R. Snyman. We are not able to translate from previously published sources, unless we can verify that these are compatibly licensed or public domain. Except for brief, clearly marked quotations, we have to write our content from scratch. I'm afraid unless we can secure license, the content will probably need to be rewritten.

There is a form letter that I'm supposed to give you here, and it does include some useful information about where to rewrite, if you'd like, as well as how to verify license. I'll include it below. Please feel free to drop by my talk page if you have any questions. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 23:54, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Copyright problem: 101 Battalion
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as 101 Battalion, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from Beeld an Die SWA Gebiedsmag, by P.H.R Snyman; see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#101 Battalion, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author to release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at Talk:101 Battalion and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, 101 Battalion, in your email. See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0, or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:101 Battalion with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:101 Battalion. See Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at [ this temporary page]. Leave a note at Talk:101 Battalion saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Moonriddengirl (talk) 23:54, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

101 Battalion
Hi, I see you have concerns re copyright for several items on the Wiki entry I made for our long-demobilised military unit, which was part of an army which no longer exists in a territory which attained it's independance more than 20 years ago and changed it's name.

The article which I credit as providing the original backbone for my Wiki entry ("Beeld van die SWA Gebiedsmag") appeared in an internal South African Defence Force (which ceased to exist when South Africa amalgamated the SADF and MK/APLA along with the Defence Forces of the TBVC states) Public Relations department publication which no longer exists, published and copyrighten to the now defunct SADF.

The original article was a few paragraphs long and in Afrikaans which I free-translated. I then significantly expanded the original piece with many facts which would not have been available to the author, corrected many pieces of mis-information/propaganda which were in the original article and, in essence, changed the shape and form of the article so that it is unrecognisable from the original. I added entire new paragraphs and the images.

The images are either my own (the flags and standards, as well as the cenotaph), or are the common property of members of the 101 Battalion League of which I am an executive committee member. We and I give our permission for all our images to be used.

This all begs the question: Were you reacting to some complaint re use of copyrighten work? If so I should like to be put in contact with the complainant as it appears they might have reproduced MY work elsewhere without my permission.

I note now that you have seen fit to delete our entire entry.

Please explain yourself.

Paul Oxley 41.185.74.151 (talk) 06:02, 27 February 2012 (UTC)


 * South Africa does allow copyright to be held by government agencies and their employees. Copyright in South Africa for anonymous works is 50 years from date of publication; for works with a known author, like this one, they are protected for fifty years from the date of the author's death. I'm afraid that when you base an article off of an existing work that is still within copyright, you create a derivative work. The rights to create a derivative work are reserved to the copyright holder. The US law that governs us defines a derivative work as follows:

"A “derivative work” is a work based upon one or more pre-existing works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a “derivative work”."


 * Translating, revising, modifying and elaborating a copyrighted work on Wikipedia is only permitted if we have permission from the copyright holder.


 * Given that the base of your article is a work in copyright, another editor has decided to rewrite it pending some verification of permission from the copyright holder. If you are able to verify license to the rights to the original article, it can still be restored.


 * And, yes, I was responding to a question raised by somebody else.


 * In terms of your note that "I should like to be put in contact with the complainant as it appears they might have reproduced MY work elsewhere without my permission", if you are talking about any reproductions of your work on Wikipedia elsewhere, I'm afraid that you gave them your permission when you placed it here. All content on Wikipedia is licensed for liberal reuse (including by commercial entities) and modification. As you edit, look at the terms of use to which you agree underneath the edit window. You'll see that it says, "By clicking the "Save Page" button, you agree to the Terms of Use, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license." So long as reusers meet the conditions there, they have your authorization to reuse your content. If they do not meet the licensing conditions (such as by providing a hyperlink or URL to the Wikipedia article), you can complain to them directly. Some recommended procedures are listed at Mirrors and forks.


 * I will reproduce this at your talk page as well. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:23, 27 February 2012 (UTC)