Talk:Philippine Accrediting Association of Schools, Colleges and Universities

message: I've removed the copyrighted text you insist on placing in the PAASCU article. The text you have placed is merely lifted from PAASCU's website. This is a violation of Wikipedia policy. Further insistence in placing the copyrighted text will be met with reversion. Rmcsamson 14:40, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For the record, the text I 'insist' on placing in the PAASCU article is not 'merely lifted' from PAASCU's website. It was sourced from a PAASCU Accreditation Primer; my only sin is the failure to properly cite that tome. However, if such failure on my part disturbs your delicate sensibilities, I shall refrain from reverting it again, for the moment. =) -- Kguirnela 16:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The problem is not citation, but copyright violation. The same text you insist on restoring is available in www.paascu.org.ph. The primer you are talking about can be accessed via the website. In any case, the text you insist on placing is exactly the same text in the website. It appears that since you say it's from a primer, then the text you insist on placing was also merely lifted from that source as well. This is a violation of WP:C. My sensibilities, delicate or otherwise, are of no relevance to this. The reckless violation of Wikipedia policy on copyrights is.Rmcsamson 18:05, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well you seem to assume that the Primer I was referring to is the primer available for download on the website - it is not; it was an actual primer in book form, which I assume was also used by the web developers in building the organization's web presence. The egg came before the chicken; is it still a copyvio just because the items in the book and in soft copy are exactly the same? Am I to assume that I have the right to rephrase these official policies set forth by PAASCU? Wouldn't that be "reckless"? -- Kguirnela 08:17, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The form is irrelevant. The content is substantially identical. Thus, the copyright violation still subsists. Yes, rephrasing is allowed, because there is at least an attempt to avoid recklessly placing the exact copyrighted text. What would be preferred, however, is a discussion of the contents of the primer, with possible elaboration on, say, which schools, colleges, and universities have already achieved certain levels of accreditation, criticisms faced by PAASCU's accreditation process, etc. Rmcsamson 15:00, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Cool. Well taken. -- Kguirnela 02:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  PAASCU article 

message: :Image:Paascu.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:21, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Paascu.jpg