Talk:A Critique of Pure Tolerance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Literature / Social and political / Contemporary Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophical literature
	Social and political philosophy
	Contemporary philosophy

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook

Removal of content

218.255.112.189, I removed some content from the article here. You restored it here. Let me explain more clearly why I removed that content. I removed it for copyright reasons, and because I want to be sure that this article doesn't end up in the same unfortunate mess that the article on Violence and the Sacred is currently in. The content you restored is cited to secondary sources discussing the book, rather than the book itself; it is exceptionally easy to violate copyright that way. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 23:07, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem

This article has been tagged as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) It will likely be deleted after one week unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Major contributions by contributors who have been verified to have violated copyright in multiple articles may be presumptively deleted in accordance with Wikipedia:Copyright violations.

Interested contributors are invited to help clarify the copyright status of this material or rewrite the article in original language at the temporary page linked from the article's face. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. --MER-C 15:03, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone please be more specific about what part(s) of the deleted article violated copyright and how? All I see there are fair-use quotes that don't seem to violate our guideline on non-free text. Peter Jedicke (talk) 19:26, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The revision history, how this article was created, and reading it makes it pretty obvious that this is a normal Wikipedia article. This appears to be a few freedom-of-idea-hating wikipedia editors intentionally mis-tagging articles in ways that will make keeping such ideas even in say an archive site like deletionpedia alive onerous. It really is Wikipedia cutting off its nose to spite its face. For example, listening to this interview with an academic ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGiRGPq6Axo&t=1362s ) would make one look up this article and such freedom-of-idea-hating wikipedia editors don't want people to be able to do that.