Thanks for beginning your Meister Eckhart contribution with a citation of just where the material comes from. I consider doing this to be very important for establishing that there is no copyright infringement. Eclecticology 18:01, 27 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- regarding the Shakespeare, please note that five of the plays are already included in Wikibooks, and should be transferred here. Eclecticology 04:14, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Hi Kalki, I've just moved Hamlet's soliloquy over from the English Wikipedia. I'm not sure if the title of Hamlet's soliloquy is right though. You may want to change it or move the information somewhere else to fit in with the rest of your Shakespeare stuff. Great work on all that by the way. Angela 00:00, 30 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- I fail to see why we need a separte page for Hamlet's soliloguy when it is already included in the full text of Hamlet. Admitedly, each Shakespeare play has a substantial sized file, and should probably have a smaller file for each act, but I don't attach a lot of priority to this action. I do look forward to the day when we can show line numbers in this and a lot of other poetry, and if we are really nice maybe our overworked tech people will devise some system for making annotations without breaking up the flow of the text. Eclecticology 22:04, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- I did end up using the text at Wikiquote in the quotations page for Hamlet but don't see any need for keeping it here. Kalki 22:25, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Martin Luther King "I have a dream" speech
- The Estate of Martin Luther King, Jr., Inc. brought this copyright infringement action against CBS, Inc. after CBS produced a video documentary that used, without authorization, portions of civil rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King's famous "I Have a Dream" speech at the March on Washington on August 28, 1963. The district court granted summary judgment to CBS on the ground that Dr. King had engaged in a general publication of the speech, placing it into the public domain. Estate of Martin Luther King, Jr., Inc. v. CBS, Inc., 13 F.Supp.2d 1347 (N.D.Ga.1998).
--Maio 02:20, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- Hold on there! The US Court of Appeals decision referenced above added three words to its headnote: "We now reverse". This suggests that including this text would be a violation of copyright. Eclecticology 09:37, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- I had noted the same thing, and was typing in a comment to that effect, but became distracted by other things, and just noticed I had never actually finished and saved my edit. Checking recent changes I found your comment, and agree: unfortunately it is not likely that we will be able to provide a GFDL copy of this any time soon. I am now going to paste the talk page of "I have a dream" that had been at wikiquote onto its current talkpage here — Kalki 22:29, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- Woah, totally missed that. Lemme copy/paste the full text here + the note they have:
- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. (No. 1:96-cv-3052-WCO), William C. O'Kelley, Judge.
- Before ANDERSON, Chief Judge, RONEY, Senior Circuit Judge, and COOK(*), Senior District Judge.
- ANDERSON, Chief Judge:
- The Estate of Martin Luther King, Jr., Inc. brought this copyright infringement action against CBS, Inc. after CBS produced a video documentary that used, without authorization, portions of civil rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King's famous "I Have a Dream" speech at the March on Washington on August 28, 1963. The district court granted summary judgment to CBS on the ground that Dr. King had engaged in a general publication of the speech, placing it into the public domain. Estate of Martin Luther King, Jr., Inc. v. CBS, Inc., 13 F.Supp.2d 1347 (N.D.Ga.1998). We now reverse.(1)
- 1. Chief Judge Anderson and Judge Cook comprise the majority holding that there has been no publication of the speech that destroyed Dr. King's common law copyright protection. Chief Judge Anderson's reasoning is set out in this opinion; Judge Cook's related but somewhat different reasoning is set out in his separate opinion.
- --Maio 20:32, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for your quick reply. Hopefully, the bug will eventually be fixed to allow apostrophes in titles that appear in interwiki links.
The original idea with the Transwiki system was never to keep these items in any kind of permanent log. Their intent was to allow the easier transfer of articles from one project to another. It was based on the premise that a person in the donor project (in this case Wikiquote) would not be familiar with the policies and practices at the receiving project (in this case Wikisource). Using Transwiki would allow an article to be moved while leaving it up to a person at the receiving project to adapt it to an often different set of rules. That being said, whenever I integrate one of these articles, I also remove it from the log.
More recently I've come to realize that I should pay more attention to broken interwiki links. I am now less quick to remove redirects, and at other times I will go to the other project to fix the link. This is a little more tricky than fixing broken links within a project. I have no realistic expectations that "What links here" will ever work between projects. Eclecticology 03:53, 26 May 2004 (UTC)
Transwiki log deletions
Kalki, I must apologize for my implicit impuning of your transwiki work when I retroactively added entries for some of the articles you brought over from Wikiquote. I discovered, just as I was winding up the cleanup process resulting from the recent WQ mass speech VfD, that you had logged everything. I realized belatedly that Eclecticology had removed many of your entries, justifying his actions by his idea of the purpose of the log, in contradiction to any transwiki policy I've found here, en:Wikiquote, meta, or even en:Wikipedia. I'm a bit tired right now from all that work, but I intend to restore your log entries in the near future, unless Eclecticology provides a compelling reason why we should ignore policy and just listen to him/her. (And I intend to demand he rewrite meta:Transwiki's log section before I accept his opinion, so that this idea gets a proper community review.) Maybe nobody cares about this, and I acknowledge that Transwiki is already hard and backlogged, but if we're just going to ignore policy, we shouldn't have policy. (Sorry 'bout the rant.) ~ Jeff Q 22:12, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
I hope you can help contribute to that (literally no one except me and this other guy has contributed to it. --Member 18:36, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
Are you active any more here? If not your sysop status will probably be removed. Regards, Yann 12:50, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you are a sysop on www.wikisource.org, and because you have not been active in the last 6 months. A procedure is currently going on to remove inactive sysops.
If you wish to keep your sysop status, please answer on Wikisource:Administrators. Please indicate why you want to keep your sysop privileges.
If you do not respond, your sysop permissions will be removed.
- This went unanswered, and sysop status was appropriately removed, as I have remained generally inactive here, despite doing some extensive work during the first months of the project, prior to the split up and migration of pages into various language branches of derivative projects. ~ Kalki (talk) 23:27, 23 January 2020 (UTC)