Talk:Charlotte Philharmonic Orchestra

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because... content in question was part of the organizations press release. --174.106.64.37 (talk) 02:39, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

• Have they given permission for it to be distributed freely?Adam9007 (talk) 02:41, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

The content in question is part of an article written by a freelance author. —C.Fred (talk) 02:55, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

• • I'm confused. There are copyright notices at the bottom of that page.Adam9007 (talk) 03:01, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Heather Head wrote the article on behalf of the Charlotte Philharmonic for CharlotteBiz. If you would like to remove this, fine. I have much more content to add. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CharlotteNCisHome (talk • contribs) 03:14, 13 June 2015 (UTC) Content was given by Philharmonic for distribution. Content itself was originally published by the org. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.106.64.37 (talk) 02:43, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

• Can you provide evidence of that? Adam9007 (talk) 02:46, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Your asking for a corporate record for a dissolved org. I may be able to get you in touch with the founder directly? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CharlotteNCisHome (talk • contribs) 02:51, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

• I'm not sure I'm the right person to do that, as I'm inexperienced. All I know is that content needs to be licensed for free distribution. I'm sure someone more experienced in these matters will be along shortly Adam9007 (talk) 02:56, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

If you would like, rather than deleting the page - remove the content you "feel" is in violation - despite assuring you its not. This page, among others is under construction. I'm new to Wiki and would like to create pages for local area attractions and history that have gotten lost in time. If you can help with this, please, do. Updates or stores about the city I love! (talk) 03:00, 13 June 2015 (UTC) Most press releases by companies large and small are written by the internal PR department and the copyright is with the org itself, not a secondary party. Especially the case in magazine, print, and other media. As stated, the page can start without the content you have contested and grow from there. I'm sure there are others who will like to contribute to this page.

The question then is, will it meet the notability criteria for organizations? —C.Fred (talk) 03:01, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Absolutely. if you lived in Charlotte for several years, you would know who they are. They were featured on PBS several times, I just have not had a chance to link these tonight. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CharlotteNCisHome (talk • contribs) 03:06, 13 June 2015 (UTC) Changes made. Will submit different content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CharlotteNCisHome (talk • contribs) 03:18, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Don't understand. Removed content, and it was auto-reverted? It's 11:20pm here and I'm out for the night. What to do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CharlotteNCisHome (talk • contribs) 03:20, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

@CharlotteNCisHome: You may want to start from scratch with all original text tomorrow. —C.Fred (talk) 03:22, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

You're not allowed to remove speedy templates from your own pages.Adam9007 (talk) 03:24, 13 June 2015 (UTC) @Adam9007 Thank you. Didn't know that. @ C.Fred Better to start somewhere than nowhere, all original content now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CharlotteNCisHome (talk • contribs) 03:26, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Please remove copyright violation since page contains none, despite the disputed original content. Thank you. Updates or stores about the city I love! (talk) 03:32, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

• Done but I don't see why you couldn't have done it yourself. Adam9007 (talk) 03:35, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
  • The copyvio template that was, not the speedy. Adam9007 (talk) 03:41, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
• Thank you Adam9007. At least now other people can add, contribute, and find the subject matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CharlotteNCisHome (talk • contribs) 03:36, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Of course, even if it wasn't subject to copyright, I don't know whether that means it's free to distribute or not. Adam9007 (talk) 03:43, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Charlotte Philharmonic Orchestra. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150615030836/http://www.greatercharlottebiz.com/article.asp?id=340 to http://www.greatercharlottebiz.com/article.asp?id=340
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150614201328/http://www.pricerubin.com/classical/dossiers/moehringdoss.pdf to http://www.pricerubin.com/classical/dossiers/moehringdoss.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:58, 20 November 2016 (UTC)