Draft talk:Theoria (sociology journal)

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.

Niklas.Andersson.95 (talk · contribs) has been paid by Theoria. Their editing has included contributions to this article. Disclosure provided below and on userpage.

Contested deletion[edit]

This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because... (your reason here) --Niklas.Andersson.95 (talk) 21:56, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to add that this is my first article on Wikipedia. This is part of my internship project to create an entry of the journal. Please excuse my lack of experience in following the proper procedures for creating articles. Is there a way to see specifically which sections are triggering the copyright violation strike? Also, when I am at it, I need guidance on how to properly refer to recoded interviews, as they form the basis of most of the written text in this entry. Niklas.Andersson.95 (talk) 00:06, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a work in progress, and I have permission from the management of the journal to use their texts and images, as this article is intended to be an informative entry about a South African focused academic journal. I misunderstood that as long as I cited where the text came from, it would be okay, but I will correct this by re-writing those sections. I believe these changes are easily done and therefore do not warrant a deletion of the entry.

@Niklas.Andersson.95: Click on the "copyvios report" link in the deletion notice to get the report that detects copyright violations. Please note that stating that you the permission of your employer isn't enough to post their copyrighted works. That authorization can only come from the verified copyright owner directly. They must also realize that releasing it for use on Wikipedia means they grant anyone in the world permanent and irrevocable permission to copy their text and images for any use, including commercial purposes.

You will also have to disclose as a paid editor, as your internship is considered compensation for your writing here. I have left a notice on your talk page covering these points in case this draft and talk page are deleted. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 03:27, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response! I will go through what you pointed out. I just wanted to add that I am an unpaid intern and receive no monetary benefits. Also, how do I proceed to get authorization for the copyright material from the journal on Wikipedia? Niklas.Andersson.95 (talk) 10:49, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that the draft was spared from deletion. In the future, authorization for use of copyrighted material can be obtained by following the instructions at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. This process will have to be completed by your superiors, as only the verified copyright holders have the authority to grant permission for the release of any text or images.

Interns, paid or unpaid, must disclose as paid editors. Your internship itself is considered to be non-monetary compensation; see the section entitled "Additional notes on who must disclose" in the paid contribution disclosure policy. It appears that you have done this, so you're in compliance now - thank you. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 12:41, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sources[edit]

@Niklas.Andersson.95: I can tell you right away that your draft will have problems because of some of your sources:

Twitter is a self-published source, like all other social media. There is no editorial review with social media; the users themselves write and publish the content directly. That means they are not considered to be reliable sources. Also, since it is the organization's own account, it is also a primary source and therefore lacks independence.
You've cited something called "Interview with Lawrence Hamilton" but it links to nothing. Therefore, whatever statements where you've used this a citation are unverifiable. Even if you had a link to this interview, interviews with people involved with the subject are also considered primary sources.
Likewise you've also got a citation called "Interview with Professor Raphael de Kadt, previous editor-in-chief of Theoria", which just links to his Linkedin profile. There is no actual content to verify the statements where you've used this as a citation. As well, Linkedin is a social media site, with the same problems as I described in the first item.

--Drm310 🍁 (talk) 12:53, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback.

I will remove the Twitter source, as I already have another that covers that section, but it is still directly linked to the journal and its parent organization. Regarding the interviews, they are placeholders for the sources. I am currently trying to figure out how to best display them on the internet so they work as sources for Wikipedia. Please accept my apology if this is not the correct way to do it, but I did not know how else I could move forward with writing the entry. Niklas.Andersson.95 (talk) 10:24, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]