Talk:Jeremiah Vandyke House

National Register of Historic Places Low‑importance

	National Register of Historic Places portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

New Jersey Low‑importance

	New Jersey portal This article is part of WikiProject New Jersey, an effort to create, expand, and improve New Jersey–related articles to Wikipedia feature-quality standard. Please join in the discussion.New JerseyWikipedia:WikiProject New JerseyTemplate:WikiProject New JerseyNew Jersey articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Copied content[edit]

@Chapmaa Hi! Thanks for creating this article. Please help resolving the tagged issues by writing a paragraph of prose in your own words, and reducing the copied content by ~90% —Alalch E. 17:08, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, really appreciate the feedback. I took your advice and wrote my own overview. I am the current home owner and have a friend who is a historian for the state and was able to find some history for the house which I have also added. I do not have links to the materials he used as I believe these were in some cases microfiche or even paper documents - hope that's OK. I have kep the references to the official national register, etc. in the document. Chapmaa (talk) 19:27, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for responding to this request. I respect your effort very much. Over time you will see that the article will change a lot due to input from other editors to make it accord with Wikipedia's requirements and conventions, and some portions may be removed, some new content may, hopefully, be added, but moving away from raw excerpts is a huge step in the right direction in my opinion. —Alalch E. 22:24, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Onel5969: About this -- I was unble to determine that all of the copy-pasted content is in the public domain. The copy tag was about the second excerpt (not about the first one), which is not a us.gov site. Also, do you oppose the over-quotation tag? —Alalch E. 17:57, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I did a copyvios search, and it did not turn up anything. That said, the second excerpt, while not from a Federal government source directly, was funded by the Federal government, and bears not copyright indication. I'm going to ping one of WP's experts on CV's, Whpq and ask their opinion. Regardless, a PD notice should be added to the page (I missed that there wasn't one-but will add it now). But I agree that there is a concern regarding the second excerpt. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:11, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You folks have already done the digging. What is the source (URL) from which stuff was copied? -- Whpq (talk) 19:07, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The source is a pdf of a document prepared by the company Wise Preservation Planning LLC for the Hopewell Township Historic Preservation Commission, which pdf is hosted on the volunteer site Hopewell Valley History Project:

https://data.hopewell-history.org/hvhist/Hopewell-History/Hw-Books-Historic/2003-Hw-Cultural-Survey-Hw-Twp-NJHPO_111.pdf

—Alalch E. 21:17, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Onel5969, Alalch E., and Chapmaa: - Being funded by the US federal government is not the same thing as a publication by the US federal government. Documents are copyrighted by default and do not need to carry a copyright notice to be copyrighted. So in this case, any material copied from the article and {{Copyvio-revdel}} needs to be applied. Can somebody do this and I or some other admin will take care of it. Thanks. -- Whpq (talk) 19:03, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Onel5969 and Alalch E.: I am the original author and the homeowner but I don’t see a conflict as I’m just trying to record much of the research that came with the house and that we’ve done over the last 20 years. Is it ok for me to remove the flag about potential conflict? It’s not for sale or anything.

@Chapmaa: Don't worry about this. Conflict of interest is a description of a situation whereby a concrete set of facts fits into an abstract, highly objectivized, scenario. That someone has edited an article about a property they own is something that is always labelled as a conflict of interest. Eventually the tag will go away, as the article is worked on more; it's best to give it a little more time.

Separately from that -- about your original research on the topic: please see our policy on the prohibition of original research. —Alalch E. 02:10, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]