Talk:Backa Theatre

Sweden Low‑importance

	Sweden portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles 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.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Theatre Low‑importance

	Theatre portal This article is part of WikiProject Theatre, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of theatre on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.TheatreWikipedia:WikiProject TheatreTemplate:WikiProject TheatreTheatre articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comment[edit]

OK. I´ll make som revisions - reformulate some statements, so that it can be no sucpicion of copyright intrution.Erik031 10:03, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I rewrote the statements that were the same as the text on the homesite of the theatre. I hope the fact that I use the facts from the website aren't considered a copyright intrution - surely, that would mean that most newspaper are violating the copyright whenever they use external sources... Erik031 10:12, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While using facts from a website is of course OK, copying text is never. Ever. Not even if you reformulate it. What matters here is not whether there can be any suspicion of copyright violation, but if there IS any copyright violation. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 14:42, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but this text now is a generally formulated text about the theatre. In its present condition it is not copyed from the website - and from the beginning it was two or three sentences that were. The problem is that if you demand that all things (facts) that is on the background info on the homepage of the theatre should be omitted from the wikitext, there is simply nothing you can say about the theatre. For example: Backa theatre is a part of the City Theatre, it was founded by Eva Bergman and so forth... A copyright violation means taking a text from another source in extensio. I haven´t. Erik031 15:51, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can a third party please look at the text and the fotnote source I´ve provided... Erik031 15:59, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe it constitutes a copyright violation for now. However, you can't just remove speedy deletion-tags - leave it in place until an admin has investigated the issue. That's why I put it back. It will probably be kept, though.Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 20:53, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About the possible copyright problems[edit]

I'm sorry but I've had to delete the article. While there were changes from the original form copied from another website, they text was substantially the same. Simply rewriting another's text and moving it around a bit isn't sufficient to avoid copyright problems. Please feel free to rewrite the article in your own words. Shell ^babelfish 02:56, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Backa Theatre. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:09, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]