User talk:Avebury67307/sandbox

Concerning the nomination for speedy deletion

As an inexperienced editor but an experienced lute player I understand the importance of the subject (a person who is not me) and his importance in the lute world is surprisingly lacking in Wikipedia. A BBC page http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/artists/a897d5df-4138-49b1-ac06-8dc729402663 is what alerted me to this gap in Wikipedia as the page requests information about the musician with a Wikipedia article as a specific requisite. It is hoped that an experience editor can modify the format successfully to enable the information inclusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avebury67307 (talk • contribs)

There is no doubt about Lindberg's significance as a musician (I own a couple of his Dowland recordings). The speedy deletion nomination was hasty and careless, so I removed it. Anyone except the author has the right to do this. However, the first versions of the article were very close in wording to other texts about Lindberg that I can find on the web. This is a serious problem from a copyright point of view. It has since been developed to a state where this is no longer as obvious. However, the earlier versions are still available from the history of the article, which still makes it a problem.

I would suggest moving this to your sandbox (I can do this for you), where you can continue working on it at your leisure. As an expert of sorts you should be capable of writing about Lindberg, basing it on good sources (that do not need to be on-line) but with the article text put completely in your own words. Once finished, you can cut and paste your own text back to the Jakob Lindberg page. At that point there should be nothing left that can be seen as plagiarized word-by-word from any other source, unless it is a short quotation clearly marked as such. The history of your sandbox can then be deleted. How about that? --Hegvald (talk) 00:06, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Ok - thank you if you could move it to the sandbox - I do need to get some rest in a few moments so is it possible to get the basic idea of it as exists back up without that dreaded history? I'll try to rework it all to make sure it isn't so noticeable and carry out the task of Discography etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avebury67307 (talk • contribs) 00:16, 1 March 2014 (UTC)