From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

21 February 2012

Suspected copyright violations (CorenSearchBot reports)

SCV for 2012-02-21 Edit Wikipedia:Suspected copyright violations/2012-02-21

Copyright investigations (manual article tagging)
  • No copyright concern. Material PD or appropriately licensed for use. In short the answer is no, there's no concern here. Facts and ideas are not copyrightable (see Copyright law of the United States#Idea/expression dichotomy and User:Moonriddengirl/Copyright in lists for more on this), although the way they're expressed often is. In this instant these lists bear very little resemblance to the source - there's different information in the list, different people included, we have our own criteria for inclusion for those lists that are subjective etc so there's no concern there either. -- Dpmuk ( talk) 19:53, 29 February 2012 (UTC) reply
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. Removed for now. It can be restored when permission goes through. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:37, 5 March 2012 (UTC) reply
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. -- Dpmuk ( talk) 22:55, 29 February 2012 (UTC) reply
  • No vio found, claim cannot be validated. Tag removed from article. natural evolution of the text. One single edit from August 2006 could possibly be at issue, but without a source, no conclusions can be drawn. -- MLauba ( Talk) 09:48, 1 March 2012 (UTC) reply
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:39, 5 March 2012 (UTC) reply
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 02:32, 5 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Items from User:DpmukBOT/Backlog:

End. MER-C 02:31, 22 February 2012 (UTC) reply

  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:48, 5 March 2012 (UTC) reply
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

21 February 2012

Suspected copyright violations (CorenSearchBot reports)

SCV for 2012-02-21 Edit Wikipedia:Suspected copyright violations/2012-02-21

Copyright investigations (manual article tagging)
  • No copyright concern. Material PD or appropriately licensed for use. In short the answer is no, there's no concern here. Facts and ideas are not copyrightable (see Copyright law of the United States#Idea/expression dichotomy and User:Moonriddengirl/Copyright in lists for more on this), although the way they're expressed often is. In this instant these lists bear very little resemblance to the source - there's different information in the list, different people included, we have our own criteria for inclusion for those lists that are subjective etc so there's no concern there either. -- Dpmuk ( talk) 19:53, 29 February 2012 (UTC) reply
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. Removed for now. It can be restored when permission goes through. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:37, 5 March 2012 (UTC) reply
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. -- Dpmuk ( talk) 22:55, 29 February 2012 (UTC) reply
  • No vio found, claim cannot be validated. Tag removed from article. natural evolution of the text. One single edit from August 2006 could possibly be at issue, but without a source, no conclusions can be drawn. -- MLauba ( Talk) 09:48, 1 March 2012 (UTC) reply
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:39, 5 March 2012 (UTC) reply
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 02:32, 5 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Items from User:DpmukBOT/Backlog:

End. MER-C 02:31, 22 February 2012 (UTC) reply

  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:48, 5 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook