Talk:Conflict archaeology

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

External link

WP:LINKVIO it is against policy to link to pages that violate copyright. In any case, a single paper on one narrow example of conflict archaeology isn't a great loss to an article on the disciple as a whole. Removing. ascorbic (talk) 07:55, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply
]

I'm afraid your interpretation of
WP:UNDUE ascorbic, but I suggest the content of the link is central to the subject of the article) -Roxy the dog™ (resonate) 09:20, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply
]

I am the author and I have the copyright in this work, not the University. I have not given permission for me work to be used in this manner as I reserve the right to be published elsewhere. It needs to be taken down. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rfebris (talkcontribs) 10:35, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Commenting here after the author of the dissertation emailed OTRS (Ticket#2014100110008981). This link violates the
WP:ELNO. I am re-removing the link, Roxy, kindly do not put it back again. Yunshui  13:06, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply
]
It is a pity that both the author and the OTRS volunteer misunderstand the nature of copyright. However, if the dissertation is considered unverifiable, I hope nobody tells the uni, as they might give the paper a bad grade. I sincerely hope not. Both of you should remember that a copyright holder does not control what links to said copyright work on the internet. This encyclopaedia would be in terrible trouble if they did - think about it. Point 2 of wp:elno doesn't say what you say it says either, but I accept that this dissertation may be being hosted illegally (wp:elnever) on the Toblerone Trail website and so I wont be replacing the link in the article. BTW, there are a number of links to the .pdf out there on teh internetz that you may wish to track down. -Roxy the dog™ (resonate) 13:44, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Roxy the dog: Apparently it has now been legitimately published at [1] - the author has no problem with this link being added instead, if you wish. By the way, I think you may be right about my reading of ELNO#2, so please disregard that as a reason for removal. Yunshui  07:10, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]