Talk:Dunstable Priory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Bedfordshire (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bedfordshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bedfordshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Note icon
The infobox box status of this article has been marked as: Incomplete

Copy and Paste[edit]

A large part of the History section appears to be directly copied and pasted from the British History Online webpage: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=40038
The article does reference the original author of the information (Page, William; Doubleday, Herbert Arthur, eds. Houses of Austin canons: The priory of Dunstable in The Victoria History of the County of Bedford: Volume 1, 1904, pp. 371-377), however, it is still directly copied and pasted.
Copyright on written sources in the UK is valid for 70 years after the author's death. The book was published in 1904, so unless the author then died before 1943, there is a very real risk that the copy and pasting is a copyright violation.

Rushton2010 (talk) 14:13, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

It appears to be a direct copy and paste from the webpage in question, even down to punctuation and casing. My first reaction in this case, is that the website's copyright has been violated as the page in question clearly states that all rights are reserved and their FAQ's section suggests reproducing text is not allowed. It may also be the case that the copyright of the book has been violated, but for the present time that is a moot point. The editor who inserted the text asserts it is in the public domain. I'm going to consult another editor, with greater knowledge than I. Thanks for spotting it and flagging it. Pol430 talk to me 15:21, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
Following further advice, it appears that the original text is Public Domain by Wikipedia standards. There is no evidence that the website has editorialized this text, with the exception of their own inline citations; these were not included in the text-dump edit which introduced this text to the article. On this occasion, it appears there is no infringement; although, it was a valid concern and thanks Rushton2010 for raising it. Pol430 talk to me 10:27, 10 May 2013 (UTC)