Talk:Alec Campbell

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion not met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces (nations and regions): Australian military history task force

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Stub	This article has been rated as stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Portal	Alec Campbell is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

[edit] Thanks

Dear Aaron,

thank you very much for your additional work on the article Alec Campbell. Today i was going to add more internal links, you have done that already. A perfect teamwork, thanx once more. By the way, about the copyrights: I have has well crown copyright permission of the Ministry of Culture and Heritage, New Zealand. You may have seen my homepage, i wish i would have some more time to make the history information more than it actually is at this stage. I live in Turkey and i have lots of friends living and having businesses at Gallipoli (please see for example the homepage of journalist [1] Ayhan Oncu, with lots of info and pics about last ANZAC Day, that gives me always the chance beeing always up to date about ANZAC Day themes.

Many greetings, and keep up the good work

-olympos2

Wikipedia is always a team enterprise - that's exactly what makes it so successful. Sometimes the the fact that the fact that its on the internet can encourage problems to develop in communication and unfortunately thats what happened here, particularly in that I didn't realise that you had permission. While I'm a major contributor to the article, I'm not the only editor and I don't think of myself as the author or anything like that. - Aaron Hill 10:11, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] LAST ANZAC

Dear Aaron, i can tell you that i am really unhappy about the fact that you did remove my contribution about Alec Campbell. Your note: "(rvt, previous edit copyvio from [www.anzacday.org.au/education/activities/alec_campbell/images/alec_campbell.pdf])" is not true at all, mate. You are dreaming. I spent a good time on it, to review the page of Alec Campbell. The page was very poor before, like it is again now after your removal. Parts of the text i used there (but not 100% equal), is from my own website www.anzacday.info exactly hosted at www.anzacday.biz/anzac_history/last_anzac.htm Some of the facts on my homepage about Alec Campbell are with permission from www.defence.gov.au, perrmission granted to me in 2003. Last week when i found the Wikipedia page, i really liked to spend my time to contribut here as well, but now i became sick of it. Aaron, better you do everything on Wikipedia yourself.

regards Heiko

Hi Heiko,

I hope you're not too discouraged by my terse nature in edit summaries, but to be honest, I've probably reverted about 30 copyright violations and this is the only one that has actually created an issue. Also, it wasn't just the occasional phrase that was copied in this particular case, but rather 50% of the article was copied and this formed about 90% of the edit. If you didn't have permission, this is a breach of Australian and United States copyright law.

Since it appears that you may have permission for use and in that case I do apologise for reverting the article initially. I've rewritten the article to try and integrate the two components into the one piece of prose rather than for it to skip from one bit to the other so suddenly. By the way, "Avoid Copyright Paranoia" is a hotly debated topic and is far from policy and I consider myself quite firmly on the "paranoia" side. A simple reversion is usually the standard for copyvios, especially in such cases where the entire contents of an edit seem to be a violation of copyright, especially when this copyright is clearly established in the case of a Commonwealth Government webpage. - Aaron Hill 13:48, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] If you find a copyright infringement

It is not the job of rank-and-file Wikipedians to police content for possible copyright infringement, but if you suspect one, you should at the very least bring up the issue on that page's talk page. Others can then examine the situation and take action if needed. The most helpful piece of information you can provide is a URL or other reference to what you believe may be the source of the text.

Some cases will be false alarms. For example, if the contributor was in fact the author of the text that is published elsewhere under different terms, that does not affect their right to post it here under the GFDL. Also, sometimes you will find text elsewhere on the Web that was copied from Wikipedia. In both of these cases, it is a good idea to make a note in the talk page to discourage such false alarms in the future.