Talk:Qatif Project

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Saudi Arabia Portal This article is part of WikiProject Saudi Arabia, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Saudi Arabia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

This article has been automatically assessed as Stub-Class by WikiProject Saudi Arabia because it uses a stub template. If you agree with the assessment, please remove the {{Stubclass}} template from this talk page. If you disagree with the assessment, please change it by editing the class parameter of the {{Saudi}} template, removing the {{Stubclass}} template from this talk page, and removing the stub template from the article.

	Energy Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, which collaborates on articles related to energy.
Stub	This article has been rated as stub-Class on the assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating within energy.
Help with this template This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

I noticed that you listed the Qatif Project article on Wikipedia:Copyright problems. The article does not contain any copyright violation, since the information taken is indeed under fair use. (All information found identical to some parts of the newspaper article is property of Saudi Aramco which released it to press in August 2004) - Eagle 15:55, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)

I can't find the original press release from Aramco, so there's no choice but to treat the newspaper article as the original source. In either case, I'm not sure how this falls under fair use. The wiki article seems to violate one of the key fair use tests: the majority of our content (~75% on quick scan) is taken from the original, copyrighted source. There are no hard and fast rules for fair use, but I don't think we can make a good-faith assumption that the current wiki usage is fair use.Feco 19:24, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)