Talk:Ecolig

In my opinion, this may NOT qualify for deletion because it is NOT a copyright violation from http://ewh.ieee.org/soc/e/sac/meem/index.php/meem/article/viewFile/78/70 . Those articles are different. Anyway, just to let you know, I am the author of both articles. It is supposed to be a contribution to Wikiversity but if you disagree, please delete everything, I mean all comments and talk page as well, Regards. - User:Paulomiguel 10:08, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

So that you can allow its use in here by sending a permision to info-en at wikimedia.org.--Juan de Vojníkov 10:41, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

A copyviolaion is more than copy and paste - if you have the same information as a work and the same structure with a little variation with many of the same words used (but not 100% exact same wording), there is still a copyright problem. It is to protect writers, especially since once it is up on a place like Wikiversity anyone can take it and use it at will without any authorial control. Ottava Rima (talk) 13:48, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

I went through earlier today and did a text comparison to the referenced article. Anything that was a direct copyright violation was summarily removed. I cannot vouch for the remainder of the text, only that it does not match up to the text from the article. Geoff Plourde 21:08, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Good. Now, you have to remember that not everything is direct copy and paste so if anyone wants to check, look for phrases that may have one or two words that are different but are mostly saying the same. Ottava Rima (talk) 21:34, 7 August 2010 (UTC)