Talk:Noela Hjorth
Latest comment: 8 years ago by Rrburke in topic OTRS ticket – review?
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
 | The content of this article has been derived in whole or part from http://artaddiction.net/members/hjorth/hjorth.htm. Permission has been received from the copyright holder to release this material. Evidence of this has been confirmed and stored by VRT volunteers, under ticket number 2016030610003263. Text was authored by the subject, not http://artaddiction.net This template is used by approved volunteers dealing with the Wikimedia volunteer response team system (VRTS) after receipt of a clear statement of permission at permissions-en  wikimedia.org. Do not use this template to claim permission. |
Untitled
edituser Klarelanson waiting on outcome of email [Ticket#: 2016030610003263] regarding image copyright.
OTRS ticket – review?
editDiscussing here as requested on this unfamiliar template, though it seems a bit odd … Rrburke, could I ask you to take another look at this? I'm not managing to convince myself that the permission is complete – I see a claim that the content was originally written by Noela Hjorth, but I don't see any substantiation of that claim, nor anything which would allow the representatives of Hjorth's estate to release content on artaddiction.net. Am I wrong? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:51, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hi, @Justlettersandnumbers: The text for profiles on artaddiction.net is written by the site's members (i.e. the artists themselves); the membership page at http://artaddiction.net/webpages/aa-membership.htm reads "you are welcome to submit and show right away up to 38 works along [sic] the related information, artist statement, resume/CV or short biography." I had a look at the membership agreement and it makes no mention of the contents of profiles becoming the property of artaddiction.net any more than the artworks displayed on the profiles do, so while the site may place copyright notices on their pages, the copyright for the text, like that of the artworks, nonetheless remains with the writer and not the site. Nevertheless I've suggested to the editor that the article would better be rewritten from scratch than copied-and-pasted from a website, even if they do hold copyright to the text. -- Rrburke (talk) 11:56, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
- OK, many thanks, Rrburke. I'm still a bit uncomfortable about it, but of course am happy to accept your judgement here. Does that end the discussion? – do you want to change the template to {{ConfirmationOTRS}} so as to show the dual licence?
- I fully agree that the text should be rewritten – and by an editor without a conflict of interest. It'll also need to be supported by independent reliable sources, of course. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:41, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reminder! I've changed the tag. I agree the article needs work. -- Rrburke (talk) 13:38, 14 April 2016 (UTC)