Talk:Fifth-graders have sex in class, charged with obscenity
Add topicLatest comment: 17 years ago by Thunderhead
Looks scarily similar to the actual AP story... —Zachary talk 11:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- u're right on the spot. thanks for picking up on it. –Doldrums(talk) 11:37, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, I think if we revert to this revision, it would be okay (the next revision was the copied text). —Zachary talk 11:47, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- If there is a copyvio in the version history then it should be oversighted. --Brian McNeil / talk 12:26, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, I think if we revert to this revision, it would be okay (the next revision was the copied text). —Zachary talk 11:47, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- i don't think hiding the revisions is necessary. ensuring we don't publish a revision which is copyvio is enough. the policy calles for "Removal of copyright infringement on the advice of Wikimedia Foundation counsel."[italics mine]. don't think its necessary otherwise. there's also the alternative of deleting the article and restoring only non-copyvio version. "Oversight is for material that should not be available even to an admin." –Doldrums(talk) 13:11, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- Since the copyvio material was made after my original story, I'd say we revert to the diff above. Thunderhead ► 20:14, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- If there's no objection, I'll go ahead and do that. Thunderhead ► 20:19, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- Since the copyvio material was made after my original story, I'd say we revert to the diff above. Thunderhead ► 20:14, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete and restore the non-copyvio versions. --Brian McNeil / talk 20:27, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Sources?
[edit]Umm yeah we need more than 1 source and obcenity is not a felony. 14:36, 13 April 2007 (UTC)