Talk:Tutwiler Hotel: Difference between revisions
m (Talk:Tutwiler Hotel moved to Talk:Tutwiler Hotel (1914): Separating article for original and current hotels.) |
|
(No difference)
|
Revision as of 18:26, 30 November 2006
Tutwilers
We'll need to distinguish between the old Tutwiler Hotel and the present one with separate articles. --Dystopos 14:04, 30 November 2006 (PST)
- Oh, good point. That makes ripping out the last portions even easier. So should the article be moved to Tutwiler Hotel (1914)? And I'll have to undo my categorization changes. (Oops.) --Lkseitz 14:16, 30 November 2006 (PST)
- I think you're already ahead of me in thinking over the best strategy. --Dystopos 14:25, 30 November 2006 (PST)
Copyright?
Please pardon my suspicions, but as this entry was created by the self-confessed director of sales for the Tutwiler, it strikes me not as something that was written specifically for BhamWiki, but a press release or news story that was conveniently lying around. The last three paragraphs, in particular, sound like a press release about the hotel's remodeling. And after some searching I found the source for those. [1]
So my question is, where do we go from here? I can rip out the last three paragraphs or so and rewrite those. (In fact, I was probably going to anyway.) But what do we do about the rest? Even if the first part is not infringing, a source for the quotes would be nice. --Lkseitz 14:13, 30 November 2006 (PST)
- The text should be copyedited to comply with our policy on neutrality and verifiability, and expanded. While it would be best to avoid plaigiarizing from the the Tutwiler's publicity, I don't think copyright per se will be an issue since the contributor is no doubt acting on behalf of the copyright-holder and is empowered to place the work under our CC license. Bottom line, it can be improved but there's no emergency. In my opinion it provided a good starting place for what will no doubt soon be a fine pair of articles. --Dystopos 14:24, 30 November 2006 (PST)