Talk:Nguyen Khanh

Copyvio
The previous content of this page has been removed, as it appears to be a copyright infringement. It contains the entire transcript of a 50 minute interview: An unofficial guide for quoting from interviews may be found at Limits on quotations. ~ Ningauble (talk) 18:53, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Citation: “Interview with Nguyen Khanh, 1981.”, 04/29/1981, WGBH Media Library & Archives, (accessed 21 Feb 2013)
 * Link: http://openvault.wgbh.org/catalog/vietnam-f2fe66-interview-with-nguyen-khanh-1981


 * I noticed the same thing. It doesn't seem to be an exact copy but both the source and the representation here are about 7.000 words. -- Mdd (talk) 19:02, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * No copyright violation. See WGBH Terms and Conditions, specifically: Non-commercial, Personal Use Only: This Site and the Content therein may be used for bona fide personal, educational, non-commercial purposes only. Usage on Wikiquote fulfills at least two of those terms, educational, and non-commercial. WGBH is also a non-commercial public broadcasting service; a member of PBS. Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 19:13, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, this is Wikiquote after all, so it would be best to select only the most relevant passages from the interview, instead of posting everything here. In any case, I don't understand why the whole content of the article was deleted (better to trim it than to remove everything, one would think). ~ Daniel Tomé (talk) 19:13, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Same here. We'll have to wait and see. Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 19:15, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Usually, when a copyright violation is suspected, the practice is to blank the entire article until the problem is resolved - if it is not quickly resolved, the next step is to nominate the article for deletion. What I would recommend is to do as suggested in the guideline Ningauble points to - namely trim the interview section of the page to at most 5 quotes. Then the copyvio tag could be removed. ~ UDScott (talk) 19:22, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you, UDScott. In any case, I have sent an e-mail to WGBH requesting permission for usage of the transcript on Wikiquote. Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 19:23, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * There is another issue apart from copyright concerns - quotability. It is the practice of this site to be selective in placing quotes - which is another reason to try to trim the page. The point is to pick only the most pithy or memorable parts of the interview to have here. It would be fine to have a link to the full interview if readers want to see more. So even if WGBH were to provide permission to place the entire transcript here, I would still not recommend doing so. ~ UDScott (talk) 19:26, 21 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Let me explain a few of the technical points that have been raised here:
 * We can't publish something that is licensed with a non-commercial restriction because our terms of use would re-release it without that restriction. Our content is licensed for any use.
 * It is customary to blank the whole page until it is resolved because, if it does turn out to be an unlawful copy, the resolution should technically delete the page rather than just edit it. We are not entitled to keep a copy in the article history. (There are ways of salvaging the non-infringing content.)
 * Even if it is in the public domain, Wikiquote is not a place for public domain documents, just quotations.
 * I hope that clarifies the situation a little. It may seem arbitrary, or be arbitrary, but there are reasons for doing things this way. ~ Ningauble (talk) 20:47, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * For my part, thanks for the clarification. ~ Daniel Tomé (talk) 21:14, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Noticing this situation a short while ago, I reviewed the previous state of this page and am suggesting Talk:Nguyen Khanh/Trimmed version as a trimmed version — I have cut or commented out much material I consider of relatively low information value... but I believe it should be an acceptable alternative. Some of the info I commented out might be arguably notable, but much of it is redundant with that already retained, and I don't believe any of the information I cut has much quotable value at all. ~ ♞☤☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 00:43, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I like that trimmed version, Kalki. Very succinct. Cheers! Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 05:26, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I've gone ahead and made Kalki's trimmed version the official version of the article. EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 16:04, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the assist, EVula! Cheers! Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 18:09, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Unsourced

 * Old wine, be thrown out.