Talk:Faith in Place

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Illinois Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois 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.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Chicago Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Environment Low‑importance This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Organizations Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations 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.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Religion Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination: No consensus, 1 May 2022, see discussion. no consensus, 1 March 2009 (UTC), see discussion.

The prose text of this article seems to be confected—with some rewriting, but not enough, I think, to avoid copyright problems—from various pages of the organization's Web site. Cf. the following pages of that site with the specified sections of the article:

• Goals: [1], [2]
• Staff: [3]
• Programs: [4], [5], [6], [7]

—Deor (talk) 16:07, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This has been addressed with the rewrite, they likely would have given permission if we wanted to keep any of it. -- Banjeboi 23:02, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"They likely would have given permission" does not justify use: they need to have actually given permission. Also, be careful about presuming that you know what permission someone else would give when they haven't been asked, and bear in mind that "you can reproduce it in this article" is not enough: it would have to be "you can use it in this article, and you have our authority to give similar permission to anyone anywhere in the world to use it and to pass on such authority without limit". JamesBWatson (talk) 20:05, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dial it down please. Did I suggest at all that we should violate copyvio policy? No. I expressed my opinion at the same time explaining that copyvio issues were now moot as the entire article has been rewritten. -- Banjeboi 12:14, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I understood that that was what you were saying. However, you mentioned the likelihood that "they likely would have given permission" in a way that might have been read as meaning that that made the past use of the material OK. Even if you did not mean it that way, it could have been read that way, and, as misunderstandings of this kind do occur I thought I would point it out. Perhaps it was unnecessary to do so, but I certainly meant no offense. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:05, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No prob then, I could have been more clear. -- Banjeboi 05:09, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]