User talk:U193581

-- billinghurst (talk) 01:06, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Coleman Brief
A couple of things about the files that you have uploaded to WikiSource. Generally we upload files to Commons: rather than to WikiSource, and the only time that it is done otherwise is when there is a chance that it will deleted from Commons. Also, the use of PDF documents in our work is not that useful, and generally we would encourage the conversion of documents to DjVu format as per Help:DjVu files, especially if there has been OCR undertaken or available within a file. While I cannot say much about the files themselves, you may wish to consider their appropriateness for WikiSource. -- billinghurst (talk) 01:06, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I am not quite sure why there seems to be an implication that the Coleman files are not useful. They aren't easily available anywhere else online and they involve a continuing legal case that is of importance to the entire nation. EdwinHJ (talk) 14:34, 21 May 2009 (UTC) [w:User:EdwinHJ]


 * Umm, not my nation. WikiSource is generally about published works and historical documents, so one can understand that pending court cases may not meet existing criteria for inclusion. With court records we ask that submitters refer to WS:IO as we have a number of cases where people submit court documents, some that are of a personal nature.  If you believe that they are documents of national importance or legal precedence, then that would seem reasonable. -- billinghurst (talk) 23:45, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * One of my fellow administrators does not believe that the licence is PD-GovEdict as this is a brief lodged to the court, and that probably indicates that the document may not be in the Public Domain for us to reproduce as per Copyright. I tend to agree with their assessment. billinghurst  sDrewth  21:27, 15 January 2010 (UTC)