Talk:Hoghton Tower

Article as at 22 February 2024

I came across this due to an copyright investigation. There certainly was some identifiable CV, which I have sought to remove. But I ended up doing rather a bigger trim than intended. This was mainly because:

• The CV, for example, the Interior section was very reliant on this source, [1];
• The History section was, for me, very confused. Firstly, there was a great deal of extraneous detail Secondly, there was a lot of repetition, particularly around the Declaration of Sports and the Sirloin steak anecdote, the latter having both text in the body, and a footnote covering exactly the same point. This also meant that the chronology was rather haphazard;
• Shakespeare - this was also somewhat confused, and I remain puzzled. There is material on the internet that show plans for an ambitious Shakespeare Centre at Hoghton. Was this ever built? If so, it surely deserves a mention.
• Sources - some were offline, some of the online ones were corrupted, one sending me a batch of malware from Indonesia (I removed that one). This made checking difficult.

So, my apologies if other editors think I have taken a rather bigger axe than was warranted. Material can go back in, of course, subject to sourcing and appropriate paraphrasing. KJP1 (talk) 11:12, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Well there is a business registered at Companies House, which is still active. But I see nothing about it Tower's website. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:21, 22 February 2024 (UTC) p.s. 4,000 panes of Flemish stained glass is quite a lot, so maybe that could be restored, unless the number is somehow protected by BBC copyright?

Go on, I’ve give you the 4,000 panes! The Shakespeare definitely needs some more looking into. As far as I can see, it was first suggested in the 30s, then rubbished for the next 60 years, and now has had something of a resurgence. There’s a 20 year old Guardian article that talks of plans for a Shakespeare theatre/study centre to rival Glyndbourne!, but it can’t have been built, otherwise we’d know about it? And yet that company is intriguing. Needs some more OR. KJP1 (talk) 12:48, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Was the copyrighted text lifted almost directly from the sourced material? Given that an individual who has edited this article a lot in the past has been previously banned for such exploits, I'm concerned about the ramifications of leaving said text as part of the article's edit history. Seasider53 (talk) 17:21, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

You are welcome to request revision deletion from an Admin. User:Diannaa is always very helpful. Exploits lol. But maybe you ought to warn him first. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:48, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Personally, I don't think the scale warrants rev. del. under RD1. It was one paragraph, included in one section, and it's gone. KJP1 (talk) 06:36, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

What are "the ramifications" exactly? That the publisher, e.g. BBC in this case, opens legal proceedings for copyright violation against WMF? I've asked this question in the past and have been told "that's not the kind of judgement" that editors, including Admins, are eligible to make. It would be question for the WMF legal department. But I guess Admins who are experts on copyright will have a rule of thumb to apply in such cases. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:27, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes. Seasider53 (talk) 12:40, 23 February 2024 (UTC)