![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Hi,
I just pulled
Bozeman Carnegie Library from the DYK section of the mainpage. I had looked at two phrases from the article and
the source, and noticed:
and
I haven't looked at the rest yet. Can I get a quick opinion on whether the phrasing is distinctive enough and it is to be considered plagiarism? If I'm overreacting, feel free to put it back. I have more articles from the same editor that concern me, e.g. in Cranberry Creek Archeological District "and was designated a State Natural Area in 1986" is copied word-for-word from the source. Opinions? Amalthea 10:04, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
One more finished: Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/FlyingToaster. Can someone do the closing of this? Calliopejen1 ( talk) 14:26, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
Another here: Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20101001. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 03:19, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
On a roll, here's another: Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Chewygum. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 04:17, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
One more: Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/PumpkinSky. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 15:25, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Just a thought I'm tossing out there, would it be a good idea to get a list going of what CCIs only have a few articles left to look at (i.e. 100 or fewer)? It may help bring in users who want to help but may find some of the larger ones too daunting. Plus it might help us see which ones are close to being closed so we can knock down the numbers. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 20:44, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
I've been spending some spare time trying to help out with the backlog. I started at the top of the list and have helped to finish off what is left at Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Paknur6. Looking at the other Paknur pages it seems that the contents get blanked when they are finished. Before doing so I wanted to double-check with ya'll. I wanted to make sure that I'm not doing something incorrect with the investigations and/or closing of the individual article reviews. If anyone has suggestions, comments, whatever, let me know. -- TreyGeek ( talk) 06:46, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
All of the articles appear to have been reviewed for Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Paknur. The CCI should be ready to be closed by a clerk or admin. -- TreyGeek ( talk) 05:06, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
I know mostly all of copyright policies and copyright symbols and trademarks. -- AlexakaAlex ( talk) 05:11, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
I think that CCI is a brilliant idea and Commons should perhaps have the same. But it seems that some of the CCI's are old and "dead". I do not know how many users that help check articles and files but we could probably need some more users to give a hand.
Personally I work on files so I have no experience with the CCI for articles. So this is why I only mention files here.
In january 2012 a lot of files listet on a CCI was tagged with {{ File at CCI}}and send into Category:File at CCI to warn other users not to copy the file to Commons without checking the file carefully. I think that it is a good idea. But I think it was hard to find out why the files was in the category. So I changed the template to make a link to the relevant CCI subpage and to send the files into a subcategory.
That is however no real solution. We need to check that all the unchecked files at the CCI is tagged and that all the checked files are untagged. And ofcourse most important that all unchecked files are checked so the CCI can be closed.
Any ideas what we could do to improve the process? -- MGA73 ( talk) 09:48, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
All of this user's uploads appear to be copyvvios on first glance. I can't deal with this at the moment - could others look into it? It's small enough a CCI may not be necessary. Calliopejen1 ( talk) 03:19, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
In article Raja Pratap Singh, there is some definite copying but the material is likely now out of copyright. Can somebody familiar with Copyright in India confirm that for this book from 1876. More importantly, the bulk of the text was copied from this book from 1914. Thanks. -- Whpq ( talk) 19:00, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
The request, from Rcsprinter123, is at WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure#Rcsprinter123. Churn and change ( talk) 00:41, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
It seems that Mer-C is having to carry most of the clerking load at the moment. I'm not sure if I would be suitable, but if it would help with some of that load I'd like to put my name forward as a trainee clerk. I wouldn't be able to put a lot of time to it over a full year, but with the semester finishing (and thus most of my teaching load), I shouldn't be too badly off for time until my classes start again in March, so I may be of some use. No hassles, though, if you feel I don't have the experience, or if there isn't the need at the moment. I'm cool with it either way. :) - Bilby ( talk) 01:19, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
Don't know how to do it - hopefully someone else can. Thanks! Calliopejen1 ( talk) 18:56, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Also, Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Dogfacebob and Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Druidhills and Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Ksanthosh89! Calliopejen1 ( talk) 04:28, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
This Wikipedia article on stock car racing appears to me to be one big copy vio. This is not my strong suit on Wikipedia however, and I'd appreciate a second opinion before officially filing it. Note that each section is footnoted to the June 2009 issue of a racing magazine. All in all, most odd. Article also has no talk page. Thanks. Jus da fax 03:04, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi - Following a report at the BLPN - I did a google search and found matches on worddocs ascribd and suchlike - a single uncited addition from an IP - DIFF v - I saw Racepackets name there and I seem to remember a CCI case under his username - but there may well be no connection to him, as the more I look the more it seems a drive by addition from someone with a point of view I have removed it, so unless its replaced this is deal with - regards thanks - Youreally can 14:18, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20120828 is finished. Thanks! Calliopejen1 ( talk) 18:55, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
In conjunction with Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Henry Delforn, I have created {{ subst:CCId}} for articles which are tagged for deletion without verification of copyright infringement. Current policy supports this presumptive deletion in cases where it has been verified that an individual has violated copyright in multiple points. The template presumes listing at WP:CP and advises interested contributors how to help verify the copyright status of the material or to rewrite the content if interested in its preservation. It cautions against use in cases where previous contents can be restored (where the contributor was not the creator) and recommends instead verifying infringement where other contributors have invested time (and creative content) into the article. -- Moonriddengirl (talk)
User:Retrolord has begun reviewing Richard M. Daley at Talk:Richard M. Daley/GA1. The article is currently listed in Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/HughD with 123 major edits outstanding, although HughD (and possibly others) have since resolved at least some of the paraphrasing problems with this article.
It feels necessary to inform the GA reviewer of the situation, but I'm puzzled as to what recommendation I should make about what the GA reviewer needs to do. Should the GA reviewer pass/fail the article based on other criteria alone, and assume that the CCI will clean up any copyright issues at a later date? (Thus, potentially, for a period of time we have a GA that may contain close paraphrasing.) Or, should the GA reviewer have to perform a complete assessment of whether or not there are outstanding copyright issues or not, before proceeding with the review? (And thus the GA reviewer will basically be carrying out that part of the CCI process.)
To put it another way, reviewing a GA nomination would normally only involve a requirement for a limited or cursory spot check of appropriate paraphrasing; does this particular set of circumstances change that for this particular review?
(Should I be asking this at WT:GAN instead?) -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 10:22, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Robertsch55 is finished and can be closed. — Psychonaut ( talk) 12:11, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
I ran across some copyvios by Sixth degree of separation ( talk · contribs) and have mostly tagged them in some fashion. There are two redirected articles that remain untagged, Carla Anne Robbins, and Verlyn Klineborg that need to be looked at. Now the question. This particular user is a sockpuppet. Do we ned to do a CCI and go sockpuppet tracing? -- Whpq ( talk) 11:41, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Opened Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/No barometer of intelligence. MER-C 11:59, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Given that the autopatrolled right requires an understanding of copyright rules, it doesn't seem appropriate to me for users with open CCIs to have that right. However, I notice that a few of them do. Would it be worth adding something to the instructions saying that when a CCI is opened we should remove/request to have the right removed? And/or should we go through and remove the right from those on the list who have it? Nikkimaria ( talk) 16:36, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
I appreciate that Editors want to keep CCI free of the drama that occurs in other dispute areas & noticeboards on Wikipedia. But I was looking over the case of 20130819 (who, for some reason, isn't named) and was stunned by a) the amount of work following-up on a 6 year, 100K+ edit history Editor that volunteers at CCI have to do and b) the fact that this Editor is still editing, without any apparent instruction about proper copyright guidelines or any sanctions. For all anyone knows (looking at the Editor's Talk Page), this copy and paste practice could be continuing.
To an uninvolved Editor, it seems a little nuts that an Editor can get an indefinite block for creating a sockpuppet account or being uncivil and yet other Editors create all of this extra clean-up work for this project and face no repercussions at all or have to provide any assurances that they will, in the future, obey copyright rules.
I applaud that work of Editors who labor to eradicate copyright violations since it seems like there would be a big backlog and this kind of effort goes unrecognized. But shouldn't there be some kind of penalty and follow-up so that these Editors don't repeat offend? Liz Read! Talk! 16:04, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi,
There's a CCI open for
24.57.81.185. However, the same person also seems to have edited as
24.57.110.189 (
talk ·
contribs ·
WHOIS). I think it would be a good idea to merge 189's contribs into the CCI. What do y'all think?
bobrayner (
talk)
16:53, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
I find that all, or nearly all, of CCI's I request are the result of a good faith contributor being unaware of the rules regarding copypaste and/or close paraphrasing. It's therefore both a little awkward for me, and in many cases quite alarming (or unpleasant, or whatever) for the contributor reported.
The first thing the contributor is likely to look at, after the notice on their talk page, is the CCI request itself. Therefore, the intial wording there has a significant impact on their perception of what is happening.
I'm wondering if we could change what Template:CCI-request produces, from "Reported by: Demiurge1000" to "Check requested by: Demiurge1000". Or some similar slightly less AWOOGA! AWOOGA! wording. -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 18:57, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
According to multiple warnings on User:Doc thompson's talk page, he has received a number of warnings over the last few days about adding copyright violations and is apparently continuing to do so. 2601:D:9400:3CD:C576:5BBF:D9EA:83DF ( talk) 04:28, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
In my early years of editing, I was negligent in both my understanding and application of guidelines concerning the use of non-free text. The most embarrassing instance was this September 2009 word-for-word copy and paste of two paragraphs from another website. This egregious error was brought to my attention on my talk page earlier this year. Since this was part of a problem that had also been pointed out to me in February 2010, and I feared there might be other undiscovered errors, I've slowly reviewed all of my edits for the years 2008 through mid 2011. I did not come across any additional instances of copyright violation like the one above but I did find instances of close paraphrasing, which I have repaired. I'd like to offer some assistance with the backlog here but wonder if I qualify per the WP:CCI instruction: All contributors with no history of copyright problems are welcome to contribute to clean up. Comments? Suggestions?-- — Keithbob • Talk • 21:45, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
I just finished Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Caracas 2000 -- what a mess! Could someone do whatever needs to be done to officially close it? Thanks! Calliopejen1 ( talk) 20:59, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi, guys. User:Itsmejudith left a very sensible note at the talk page of Eugen Fischer:
This is going to be a nightmare. I wish we had known before that the text edited by Virago250 was a copyvio. Itsmejudith ( talk) 19:01, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
That sounds like a really good idea to me. Before I start poking at people who make bots to ask them if there's any way to flag talk pages to let people know that an article is part of a pending CCI and that they can help (perhaps with a link to the instructions on the CCI page), I wanted to float it here and see if anybody thought it was a horrible idea for reasons that I haven't thought of. To me, it sounds kind of genius. :) Also, if anybody botty happens to see this and wants to weigh in on whether or not they can help make it happen, awesome.
In the interest of attracting comments, hi User:Wizardman, User:MER-C, User:Diannaa, User:Dana boomer, User:Voceditenore, User:Ymblanter, User:VernoWhitney, User:MLauba, and User:Madman. :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:20, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
If there is interest in such a task I could certainly run it. Anything I've read so far is simple enough considering that I already parse the case pages for the report. A few comments on the above ideas:
Amalthea 13:52, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Ok, Tasks:
Amalthea 10:22, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I've may have missed this somewhere on the main page, so apologies if I'm asking about something that's already covered.
I strongly support the elimination of copyright violations from Wikipedia, and congratulate you all for taking on a tedious and unlovely task. However, I feel that one of your colleagues has been perhaps over-zealous in his performance of his duties. How do I bring this to the attention of the appropriate forum, correct matters, and ensure that this does not happen again?
RomanSpa ( talk) 05:34, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
There was someone else that did this in the past (forgot who) claiming no copyright on many images from eday. As see here¸this is happening again ..are these ok -- Moxy ( talk) 20:29, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
The problem I'm hoping to address is a way to alert people dealing with a sockpuppet of a WP:CCI subject that copyright maybe an issue. Just today I opened a CCI for User:DendroNaja (a blocked sock of User:VeronicaPR) and have gradually discovered that these copyright issues stretch back years. Yesterday, I blocked yet another sock of User:FreshCorps916, who is blocked for serial copyright infringement. CCI has a scattering of these users, who persist in violating copyright through multiple accounts.
I believe that many people who show up at CCI are working in good faith and will contribute constructively after they understand our copyright policies and approaches (I've seen many of them do it), but this assumption of good faith doesn't extend to the ones who do it repeatedly, under multiple accounts. While I would be very unhappy if CCI became some kind of black mark on a typical user page, I think we would benefit from a tag for at least people who use multiple accounts so that those who find future socks are alerted to the need to list their contributions for review or proactive cleaning.
I wanted to broach the subject here before bringing it up perhaps at AN - I want to be sure that this has consensus and there isn't a better way. Realizing that this page isn't heavily trafficked, I'd really appreciate any thoughts. :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:10, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
Could someone please take a look at the two requests that are currently outstanding? I'm not seeing anything major, and I don't have the energy to look deeper (and won't for the near future). MER-C 12:59, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
How do I formally request than an investigation be closed? It seems that a bot has listed an enormous number of my contributions without any real intelligence behind the listings. The vast majority of them have turned up without any issues. My contributions deserve no more and no less scrutiny than anyone else's. If someone has a problem with any particulars ones, please go through the normal process of contacting me, and working with me together on them. Greg Bard ( talk) 19:32, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Is there any need for another clerk to help open, evaluate, and close requests here? If so, I could probably help out from time to time. I've been active cleaning up copyright problems here and on Commons for about ten years. On CCI I've posted fourteen requests ( Noormohammed satya, Cooly123, Ragib, Noodleki, IWannaABillionaire, Driftwooddrwho, Snigdhasinghsweet, Norden1990, Emykcul, Bormalagurski, Wdixon, Coramandel23, B. Mandal, and Zeniaacharya21), all of which were accepted, and I've helped process a good many of these and others to completion. I have experience finding sockpuppets, a reading knowledge of several languages, and access to full-text academic journal indexes, so I might be useful for evaluating complex requests involving multiple accounts, infringing translations, and/or copying from closed scholarly sources. — Psychonaut ( talk) 08:33, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
This seems both stale and uncontroversial -- no need to wait any longer! [4]. BTW, as an aside, I've been pondering on how to address the current CCI request for some time now, given the large number of sibling socks. I'm still doing so, but please don't let that stop anyone else from jumping in. -- Mkativerata ( talk) 10:52, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Could I suggest a block for User:Bože pravde? This is one of the suspected sockpuppets of User:Bormalagurski whose edits are being investigated at Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20140915. The pattern of copyvios (namely, copying from official tourist board websites of the former Yugoslav republics) matches that of a different but confirmed sockpuppet, User:WikiMB. But even on the off-chance that this isn't a Boris Malagurski sockpuppet, it's still a serial copyright violator, and could cause headaches down the line if it one day resumes activity unnoticed. — Psychonaut ( talk) 20:30, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Instructions here are too complicated ... detail is on wt:med. [5] Previous CCI closed, nothing said to or done about persistent violator, and more of same has continued for more than a year. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 02:24, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
I don't know if a full CCI is warranted yet, but I've had to revert a lot of this users recent contribs (4 today alone) as direct copy/paste: Swarupskd.wiki. His talk page is loaded with copyright warnings in general for files, drafts, etc. His User-talk space edit count is zero. Crow Caw 22:47, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
One sock account out of many was the subject of a CCI. At least some other accounts have also engaged in copyright violations, and the likelihood is that many of them have done so. What's the best way of addressing the contributions of an editor who has copied material using multiple accounts? He's been prolific, so this could turn out to be a major project. (FYI: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ctway/Archive, Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Jetwave Dave, & Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Ose\fio) Rezin ( talk) 21:14, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
I can't find a definitive answer on links to copies of copyrighted material, what I believe are known as "courtesy links". Are they permitted in cases where the hosting website doesn't mention any permission from the copyright holders? It's come up in the case of a specific website to which many WP pages have citation links. links website discussion. Examples of their pages include: [6] [7] [8] Is it OK to keep links to these hosted articles? (Let me know if this is the wrong place to ask). Rezin ( talk) 19:51, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Folks, just a heads up that I strongly suspect the return of ItsLassieTime. Though a recent SPI failed, I have seen two other accounts that have a familiar behavioral pattern. My question here, pending evidence one way or the other as to an SPI, is if there is a way to watchlist contribs for copyvio before a whole bunch more articles are destroyed beyond recognition? This user's pattern includes making dozens of very small edits to articles (one word changes and then a save) and fixing it all is a nightmare. The dup detector checkers aren't real helpful here, either, as close paraphrasing is the problem more than copy and paste. Montanabw (talk) 05:31, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Folks, I'm not sure whether this is the right place to ask this question, but I'm hoping someone could help. I've just been listed for CCI violtions, and although I note from the page that if I disagree with the nomination I should say so, I'm not sure exactly how to do so - as in, on what page do I make my case? Can someone help? Thanks.
Fulleraaron ( talk) 22:52, 14 April 2015 (GMT)
Hi guys, I'm User:Huggi, is the investigation on me still pending, just wanted to ask because I never heard anything back from you guys. Thanks! -- huggi - never stop exploring ( talk) 06:52, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello all, a discussion regarding the fair use status of text within the Timed Text namespace is being held at Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content#Fair-use_status_of_Timed_Text, if you are interested please join the discussion there. Thank you, — xaosflux Talk 04:10, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
Will one of the clerks here open a case on Shootingstar88 ( talk · contribs)? See this section for detail. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 20:50, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
@ Psychonaut and Mkativerata: I'm interested in becoming a clerk here, as there seems to be only one active clerk. I have read the instructions on the instructions page. Most of my work with copyrights have been with images; however I understand all current copyright policies, for both images and articles. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 15:59, 20 January 2017 (UTC) Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 15:59, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
User:Psychonaut Sorry for the late response, didn't see this until I checked the talk page. I am looking for that now (I'm on phone so it may be a while). Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 16:01, 23 January 2017 (UTC) Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 16:01, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Well, one thing is for certain: we need all the help we can get! Iazyges, this is an area that requires a fairly detailed knowledge of our copyright policy and our ways of dealing with copyright problems. WP:SCV used to be a good place to acquire or refine some of that, but is no longer active. Unless anyone has a better idea, I'm going to suggest that you might spend some time at CopyPatrol and also work through a small CCI (or part of a bigger one) in an area that interests you. In either case, if you're not sure what to do, you can always list at WP:CP, or ask one of the tiny handful of admins with real knowledge and experience in this area. Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 19:08, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
For a long time now but I am not sure on all images but there were a fair number that I reported on wiki-commons that this editor uploaded which I knew were copyrighted material. This user I am sure is still doing that I wasn't sure how to report a case here (didn't want to mess up the main page!) and feel for the benefit of wiki to report him for a multitude of violation in uploading copyrighted photos. Govvy ( talk) 08:52, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
I have been going through the articles listed for this user and dealt with all the ones that had not been checked by other users, so the investigation could be closed. I found little wrong with the shorter ones but some close paraphrasing in a few of the longer ones. The problem mainly was that the amount of information in the sources used was limited and written in a rather stilted style, and our articles tended to use the same words because of lack of alternatives. Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 13:27, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I recently tagged an article as copyright violation and over the copyright issues encountered this site. This page has a massive backlog back to 2010 and is thus obviously not working. Removal of copyright violations, however, definitely has to work. A localized discussion here will simply not work so I will skip the steps at WP:RFC and make a RFC directly: How do we fix this backlog and make sure it doesn't come back again? Lurking shadow ( talk) 21:37, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
There is long-standing consensus that poking people on noticeboards is not helpful in dealing with backlogs (e.g. see any "AIV backlog" thread on ANI), and without a tangible proposal beyond "what should we do", that's essentially what this RfC is. Further, talk page discussions have generally not resolved workload issues in the past and I don't imagine they are about to now in one of the most poorly understood administrative areas on Wikipedia. I have removed this discussion from {{ Centralized discussion}} for the time being. TheDragonFire ( talk) 05:41, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
I fully agree with the basic tenet here – the backlog is unacceptably large, something has to change. Obviously that something is not just saying "oh well, 80000 potential copyvios unchecked, let's just archive them". Equally, we can't go on relying on a minuscule number of dedicated volunteers to deal with this, it is a community problem and needs the help of the full community to solve it.
I suggest we should look at the possibility of setting up a partially-automated process to start chipping away at it, perhaps something along the lines of what was used to deal with Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Darius Dhlomo (over 23000 articles). I'm not at all bot-literate, but tentatively: a bot tags (say) 200 articles a day with a new prod-type notice which can be removed by any extended-confirmed user once the page has been checked; after (say) a week, the bot notifies relevant WikiProjects of any page that still has the notice; after a further week, the page can be deleted (or not) by any admin, just like an expired prod. As I understand it, the Darius Dhlomo notice actually blanked the article in the same way that {{ copyvio}} does; that might be effective, but might also run into some strong objections.
Any thoughts? Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 11:28, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
but either we make this process permanent or the automatic removal and revision-deletion... depending on what works. Lurking shadow ( talk) 14:29, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Option 1:Delete all pages these copyright violators edited indiscriminately, unless they were checked off in CCI
Option 2:Prod and blank all pages these copyright violators edited(checked pages excluded) indiscriminately per bot(and then delete them after short notice)
Option 3:Manually revert to the last version and revision delete anything inbetween/speedy delete if it is the first version or otherwise speedily deletable.
(Option 4:Try to manage the backlog by individually examining every page.)
(Option 5:Do Nothing)
Option 1 is the quickest and safest method to deal with it, but also with the largest damage to genuine articles.
Option 2 may take longer and these things should be removed as fast as possible... but a few high value pages could possibly stay.
Option 3 will take significantly longer but the damage inflicted is lower(but still quite high)
Option 4 won't work because that's what's responsible for the backlog in the first place - it is too much work with not enough helpers.
Option 5 does not conform with our copyright policy and WP:PILLARS and is not legitimate. Lurking shadow ( talk) 07:00, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
As such, I support Option 1, maybe 2. Oppose Option 3(and 4 and 5)
The majority of the backlog are 'open investigations' which (as I understand it) is intended to be investigationn for copyvio, rather than cleaning up known copyvio. A bot could definitely assist with this process, by marking the % of copyvio'd edits (or marking which edits) are copyvios. Starting with editors with low edit counts may help, as it is impractical and probably quite time consuming to deal with editors that have a long edit record. Thoughts? -- Tom (LT) ( talk) 23:44, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Yes what you are saying is perfectly reasonable User:Tom (LT) but that is wholly different from Lurking Shadow wanting to run a bot that deletes or proddelete-tags all articles edited by all the copyright violators currently in the frontpage and if that means deleting 80,000 articles it would not be "the end of the world". Smeat75 ( talk) 13:58, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
FWIW here is the bot request I wrote on this topic ages ago. Didn't get any interest, but perhaps some bot operator now would be willing to pitch in. (Assuming that we could get the necessary number of queries for the Earwig tool.) Calliopejen1 ( talk) 19:39, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
Here. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 21:12, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi. I've tried to start helping out at Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/ItsLassieTime, but I'd like to make sure I am doing this right before going deeper. Can someone take a look? Thanks, -- DannyS712 ( talk) 02:06, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
{{subst:cclean|url= ADDRESS, INCLUDING "http://" |CCI= SomeUser }}
Could I have some assistance with the cleanup at Virginia Cooperative Extension? Some of it is obvious copyvios. Others are very close, while some I have had to dig around other to verify the information existed on different pages before Wikipedia. This is for Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Huskers110110. Thanks! -- MrLinkinPark333 ( talk) 19:36, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
I have seen that there is only 1 active clerk, And I would like step up and help here as a Clerk. I have been working Copyvios and CCI and I have not had any copyright problems. Any Supports or Opposes is welcome. Thanks, Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 19:02, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Hello. I have two questions relating to two CCIs:
Thanks! -- MrLinkinPark333 ( talk) 01:00, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
Hello. I was wondering if I did the attribution correctly (this is the first CCI i've done for attribution issues). So far, I've done 1950 in North Korea and 1972 in Iran for Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Jackninja5. Thanks! -- MrLinkinPark333 ( talk) 01:06, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
Hello again. Another question about attribution: when an article is copied from another wiki (i.e. Wikia/Fandom), the text is allowed to stay but attribution is required correct? While looking through Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Koala15, I came across a copy of Toy Story of Terror! where the plot is from this version of Fandom. Also, does the Copied template apply here or only to Wikipedia articles that copy other Wikipedia articles? Thanks! -- MrLinkinPark333 ( talk) 18:22, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello. There are some duplicate edits in the 2018 section of Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Almodaa when comparing to the first 83 articles in this CCI. Should I x the duplicates in the 2018 section and leave the first instances up for checking? Otherwise, it'd be covering the same articles twice. Examples of duplicates are Canada–Saudi Arabia relations, Elliott Broidy and United Arab Emirates. Thanks! -- MrLinkinPark333 ( talk) 02:16, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello. I was wondering if 213.149.159.237 should be added to the open CCI on Angel Angel 2. The IP was temporarily blocked in a recent SPI case related to this user. The reason why I'm asking is because their CCI is currently still open. I've checked the IP edits and haven't found any copyvios so far. Thanks! -- MrLinkinPark333 ( talk) 20:18, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
Hello. Thrres quite a bit of open requests on the CCI page that havent been decided whether a full CCI should be opened or not. Thougjt I leave a note here so they can be looked through. -- MrLinkinPark333 ( talk) 18:11, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Once again I would like to step up and become a CCI clerk. I think I earned the needed experience to become one. Best, Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 23:43, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello. Could CCI cases be updated to include socks from SPIs that have not already been included? For example: Wikipedia:Contributor_copyright_investigations/IWannaABillionaire is missing three socks that came from Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/KirkleyHigh/Archive plus IP addresses. Money already has some listed at User:Moneytrees/CCI Sort but I would want to be sure that all users with socks have their socks checked as well. If an indepth list is needed to show which ones are missing from each case, I can list them.
I also wonder if any more of the closed cases have socks besides the four that Money listed. A separate section could be made with Closed CCIs with socks that haven't been fully checked. Yes, I know it's making more work, but I feel that all should be checked. If all socks are already done like Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20130702 then they could be skipped. Thanks! -- MrLinkinPark333 ( talk) 20:09, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi. Is there a way to find out the file usage of images on WP.EN that were already deleted on Commons, such as for this one, for example? Any tool for that? Gun Powder Ma ( talk) 13:38, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
As {{
?}} looks like it may be deprecated, I've gone and created {{
WP:CCI/T}} that produces , a much better icon in my opinion. It also supports additional parameters. E.g.
Wow! . I made this because no other templates really look great for using. If people think this isn't needed, I'll be happy to
WP:G7 it. — Yours,
Berrely •
Talk∕
Contribs
18:49, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Wikipedia talk:Copyright violations § Template:Copyvio-revdel. (Apologies if this isn't the ideal place to put a notice; I'm not sure exactly which pages are generally watchlisted by copyright folks.) {{u|
Sdkb}}
talk
18:19, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Template talk:Copyvio-revdel § Changing the wording. —
Berrely •
Talk∕
Contribs
16:09, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Hi,
I just pulled
Bozeman Carnegie Library from the DYK section of the mainpage. I had looked at two phrases from the article and
the source, and noticed:
and
I haven't looked at the rest yet. Can I get a quick opinion on whether the phrasing is distinctive enough and it is to be considered plagiarism? If I'm overreacting, feel free to put it back. I have more articles from the same editor that concern me, e.g. in Cranberry Creek Archeological District "and was designated a State Natural Area in 1986" is copied word-for-word from the source. Opinions? Amalthea 10:04, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
One more finished: Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/FlyingToaster. Can someone do the closing of this? Calliopejen1 ( talk) 14:26, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
Another here: Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20101001. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 03:19, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
On a roll, here's another: Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Chewygum. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 04:17, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
One more: Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/PumpkinSky. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 15:25, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Just a thought I'm tossing out there, would it be a good idea to get a list going of what CCIs only have a few articles left to look at (i.e. 100 or fewer)? It may help bring in users who want to help but may find some of the larger ones too daunting. Plus it might help us see which ones are close to being closed so we can knock down the numbers. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 20:44, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
I've been spending some spare time trying to help out with the backlog. I started at the top of the list and have helped to finish off what is left at Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Paknur6. Looking at the other Paknur pages it seems that the contents get blanked when they are finished. Before doing so I wanted to double-check with ya'll. I wanted to make sure that I'm not doing something incorrect with the investigations and/or closing of the individual article reviews. If anyone has suggestions, comments, whatever, let me know. -- TreyGeek ( talk) 06:46, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
All of the articles appear to have been reviewed for Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Paknur. The CCI should be ready to be closed by a clerk or admin. -- TreyGeek ( talk) 05:06, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
I know mostly all of copyright policies and copyright symbols and trademarks. -- AlexakaAlex ( talk) 05:11, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
I think that CCI is a brilliant idea and Commons should perhaps have the same. But it seems that some of the CCI's are old and "dead". I do not know how many users that help check articles and files but we could probably need some more users to give a hand.
Personally I work on files so I have no experience with the CCI for articles. So this is why I only mention files here.
In january 2012 a lot of files listet on a CCI was tagged with {{ File at CCI}}and send into Category:File at CCI to warn other users not to copy the file to Commons without checking the file carefully. I think that it is a good idea. But I think it was hard to find out why the files was in the category. So I changed the template to make a link to the relevant CCI subpage and to send the files into a subcategory.
That is however no real solution. We need to check that all the unchecked files at the CCI is tagged and that all the checked files are untagged. And ofcourse most important that all unchecked files are checked so the CCI can be closed.
Any ideas what we could do to improve the process? -- MGA73 ( talk) 09:48, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
All of this user's uploads appear to be copyvvios on first glance. I can't deal with this at the moment - could others look into it? It's small enough a CCI may not be necessary. Calliopejen1 ( talk) 03:19, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
In article Raja Pratap Singh, there is some definite copying but the material is likely now out of copyright. Can somebody familiar with Copyright in India confirm that for this book from 1876. More importantly, the bulk of the text was copied from this book from 1914. Thanks. -- Whpq ( talk) 19:00, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
The request, from Rcsprinter123, is at WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure#Rcsprinter123. Churn and change ( talk) 00:41, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
It seems that Mer-C is having to carry most of the clerking load at the moment. I'm not sure if I would be suitable, but if it would help with some of that load I'd like to put my name forward as a trainee clerk. I wouldn't be able to put a lot of time to it over a full year, but with the semester finishing (and thus most of my teaching load), I shouldn't be too badly off for time until my classes start again in March, so I may be of some use. No hassles, though, if you feel I don't have the experience, or if there isn't the need at the moment. I'm cool with it either way. :) - Bilby ( talk) 01:19, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
Don't know how to do it - hopefully someone else can. Thanks! Calliopejen1 ( talk) 18:56, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Also, Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Dogfacebob and Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Druidhills and Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Ksanthosh89! Calliopejen1 ( talk) 04:28, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
This Wikipedia article on stock car racing appears to me to be one big copy vio. This is not my strong suit on Wikipedia however, and I'd appreciate a second opinion before officially filing it. Note that each section is footnoted to the June 2009 issue of a racing magazine. All in all, most odd. Article also has no talk page. Thanks. Jus da fax 03:04, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi - Following a report at the BLPN - I did a google search and found matches on worddocs ascribd and suchlike - a single uncited addition from an IP - DIFF v - I saw Racepackets name there and I seem to remember a CCI case under his username - but there may well be no connection to him, as the more I look the more it seems a drive by addition from someone with a point of view I have removed it, so unless its replaced this is deal with - regards thanks - Youreally can 14:18, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20120828 is finished. Thanks! Calliopejen1 ( talk) 18:55, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
In conjunction with Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Henry Delforn, I have created {{ subst:CCId}} for articles which are tagged for deletion without verification of copyright infringement. Current policy supports this presumptive deletion in cases where it has been verified that an individual has violated copyright in multiple points. The template presumes listing at WP:CP and advises interested contributors how to help verify the copyright status of the material or to rewrite the content if interested in its preservation. It cautions against use in cases where previous contents can be restored (where the contributor was not the creator) and recommends instead verifying infringement where other contributors have invested time (and creative content) into the article. -- Moonriddengirl (talk)
User:Retrolord has begun reviewing Richard M. Daley at Talk:Richard M. Daley/GA1. The article is currently listed in Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/HughD with 123 major edits outstanding, although HughD (and possibly others) have since resolved at least some of the paraphrasing problems with this article.
It feels necessary to inform the GA reviewer of the situation, but I'm puzzled as to what recommendation I should make about what the GA reviewer needs to do. Should the GA reviewer pass/fail the article based on other criteria alone, and assume that the CCI will clean up any copyright issues at a later date? (Thus, potentially, for a period of time we have a GA that may contain close paraphrasing.) Or, should the GA reviewer have to perform a complete assessment of whether or not there are outstanding copyright issues or not, before proceeding with the review? (And thus the GA reviewer will basically be carrying out that part of the CCI process.)
To put it another way, reviewing a GA nomination would normally only involve a requirement for a limited or cursory spot check of appropriate paraphrasing; does this particular set of circumstances change that for this particular review?
(Should I be asking this at WT:GAN instead?) -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 10:22, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Robertsch55 is finished and can be closed. — Psychonaut ( talk) 12:11, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
I ran across some copyvios by Sixth degree of separation ( talk · contribs) and have mostly tagged them in some fashion. There are two redirected articles that remain untagged, Carla Anne Robbins, and Verlyn Klineborg that need to be looked at. Now the question. This particular user is a sockpuppet. Do we ned to do a CCI and go sockpuppet tracing? -- Whpq ( talk) 11:41, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Opened Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/No barometer of intelligence. MER-C 11:59, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Given that the autopatrolled right requires an understanding of copyright rules, it doesn't seem appropriate to me for users with open CCIs to have that right. However, I notice that a few of them do. Would it be worth adding something to the instructions saying that when a CCI is opened we should remove/request to have the right removed? And/or should we go through and remove the right from those on the list who have it? Nikkimaria ( talk) 16:36, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
I appreciate that Editors want to keep CCI free of the drama that occurs in other dispute areas & noticeboards on Wikipedia. But I was looking over the case of 20130819 (who, for some reason, isn't named) and was stunned by a) the amount of work following-up on a 6 year, 100K+ edit history Editor that volunteers at CCI have to do and b) the fact that this Editor is still editing, without any apparent instruction about proper copyright guidelines or any sanctions. For all anyone knows (looking at the Editor's Talk Page), this copy and paste practice could be continuing.
To an uninvolved Editor, it seems a little nuts that an Editor can get an indefinite block for creating a sockpuppet account or being uncivil and yet other Editors create all of this extra clean-up work for this project and face no repercussions at all or have to provide any assurances that they will, in the future, obey copyright rules.
I applaud that work of Editors who labor to eradicate copyright violations since it seems like there would be a big backlog and this kind of effort goes unrecognized. But shouldn't there be some kind of penalty and follow-up so that these Editors don't repeat offend? Liz Read! Talk! 16:04, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi,
There's a CCI open for
24.57.81.185. However, the same person also seems to have edited as
24.57.110.189 (
talk ·
contribs ·
WHOIS). I think it would be a good idea to merge 189's contribs into the CCI. What do y'all think?
bobrayner (
talk)
16:53, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
I find that all, or nearly all, of CCI's I request are the result of a good faith contributor being unaware of the rules regarding copypaste and/or close paraphrasing. It's therefore both a little awkward for me, and in many cases quite alarming (or unpleasant, or whatever) for the contributor reported.
The first thing the contributor is likely to look at, after the notice on their talk page, is the CCI request itself. Therefore, the intial wording there has a significant impact on their perception of what is happening.
I'm wondering if we could change what Template:CCI-request produces, from "Reported by: Demiurge1000" to "Check requested by: Demiurge1000". Or some similar slightly less AWOOGA! AWOOGA! wording. -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 18:57, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
According to multiple warnings on User:Doc thompson's talk page, he has received a number of warnings over the last few days about adding copyright violations and is apparently continuing to do so. 2601:D:9400:3CD:C576:5BBF:D9EA:83DF ( talk) 04:28, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
In my early years of editing, I was negligent in both my understanding and application of guidelines concerning the use of non-free text. The most embarrassing instance was this September 2009 word-for-word copy and paste of two paragraphs from another website. This egregious error was brought to my attention on my talk page earlier this year. Since this was part of a problem that had also been pointed out to me in February 2010, and I feared there might be other undiscovered errors, I've slowly reviewed all of my edits for the years 2008 through mid 2011. I did not come across any additional instances of copyright violation like the one above but I did find instances of close paraphrasing, which I have repaired. I'd like to offer some assistance with the backlog here but wonder if I qualify per the WP:CCI instruction: All contributors with no history of copyright problems are welcome to contribute to clean up. Comments? Suggestions?-- — Keithbob • Talk • 21:45, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
I just finished Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Caracas 2000 -- what a mess! Could someone do whatever needs to be done to officially close it? Thanks! Calliopejen1 ( talk) 20:59, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi, guys. User:Itsmejudith left a very sensible note at the talk page of Eugen Fischer:
This is going to be a nightmare. I wish we had known before that the text edited by Virago250 was a copyvio. Itsmejudith ( talk) 19:01, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
That sounds like a really good idea to me. Before I start poking at people who make bots to ask them if there's any way to flag talk pages to let people know that an article is part of a pending CCI and that they can help (perhaps with a link to the instructions on the CCI page), I wanted to float it here and see if anybody thought it was a horrible idea for reasons that I haven't thought of. To me, it sounds kind of genius. :) Also, if anybody botty happens to see this and wants to weigh in on whether or not they can help make it happen, awesome.
In the interest of attracting comments, hi User:Wizardman, User:MER-C, User:Diannaa, User:Dana boomer, User:Voceditenore, User:Ymblanter, User:VernoWhitney, User:MLauba, and User:Madman. :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:20, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
If there is interest in such a task I could certainly run it. Anything I've read so far is simple enough considering that I already parse the case pages for the report. A few comments on the above ideas:
Amalthea 13:52, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Ok, Tasks:
Amalthea 10:22, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I've may have missed this somewhere on the main page, so apologies if I'm asking about something that's already covered.
I strongly support the elimination of copyright violations from Wikipedia, and congratulate you all for taking on a tedious and unlovely task. However, I feel that one of your colleagues has been perhaps over-zealous in his performance of his duties. How do I bring this to the attention of the appropriate forum, correct matters, and ensure that this does not happen again?
RomanSpa ( talk) 05:34, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
There was someone else that did this in the past (forgot who) claiming no copyright on many images from eday. As see here¸this is happening again ..are these ok -- Moxy ( talk) 20:29, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
The problem I'm hoping to address is a way to alert people dealing with a sockpuppet of a WP:CCI subject that copyright maybe an issue. Just today I opened a CCI for User:DendroNaja (a blocked sock of User:VeronicaPR) and have gradually discovered that these copyright issues stretch back years. Yesterday, I blocked yet another sock of User:FreshCorps916, who is blocked for serial copyright infringement. CCI has a scattering of these users, who persist in violating copyright through multiple accounts.
I believe that many people who show up at CCI are working in good faith and will contribute constructively after they understand our copyright policies and approaches (I've seen many of them do it), but this assumption of good faith doesn't extend to the ones who do it repeatedly, under multiple accounts. While I would be very unhappy if CCI became some kind of black mark on a typical user page, I think we would benefit from a tag for at least people who use multiple accounts so that those who find future socks are alerted to the need to list their contributions for review or proactive cleaning.
I wanted to broach the subject here before bringing it up perhaps at AN - I want to be sure that this has consensus and there isn't a better way. Realizing that this page isn't heavily trafficked, I'd really appreciate any thoughts. :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:10, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
Could someone please take a look at the two requests that are currently outstanding? I'm not seeing anything major, and I don't have the energy to look deeper (and won't for the near future). MER-C 12:59, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
How do I formally request than an investigation be closed? It seems that a bot has listed an enormous number of my contributions without any real intelligence behind the listings. The vast majority of them have turned up without any issues. My contributions deserve no more and no less scrutiny than anyone else's. If someone has a problem with any particulars ones, please go through the normal process of contacting me, and working with me together on them. Greg Bard ( talk) 19:32, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Is there any need for another clerk to help open, evaluate, and close requests here? If so, I could probably help out from time to time. I've been active cleaning up copyright problems here and on Commons for about ten years. On CCI I've posted fourteen requests ( Noormohammed satya, Cooly123, Ragib, Noodleki, IWannaABillionaire, Driftwooddrwho, Snigdhasinghsweet, Norden1990, Emykcul, Bormalagurski, Wdixon, Coramandel23, B. Mandal, and Zeniaacharya21), all of which were accepted, and I've helped process a good many of these and others to completion. I have experience finding sockpuppets, a reading knowledge of several languages, and access to full-text academic journal indexes, so I might be useful for evaluating complex requests involving multiple accounts, infringing translations, and/or copying from closed scholarly sources. — Psychonaut ( talk) 08:33, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
This seems both stale and uncontroversial -- no need to wait any longer! [4]. BTW, as an aside, I've been pondering on how to address the current CCI request for some time now, given the large number of sibling socks. I'm still doing so, but please don't let that stop anyone else from jumping in. -- Mkativerata ( talk) 10:52, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Could I suggest a block for User:Bože pravde? This is one of the suspected sockpuppets of User:Bormalagurski whose edits are being investigated at Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20140915. The pattern of copyvios (namely, copying from official tourist board websites of the former Yugoslav republics) matches that of a different but confirmed sockpuppet, User:WikiMB. But even on the off-chance that this isn't a Boris Malagurski sockpuppet, it's still a serial copyright violator, and could cause headaches down the line if it one day resumes activity unnoticed. — Psychonaut ( talk) 20:30, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Instructions here are too complicated ... detail is on wt:med. [5] Previous CCI closed, nothing said to or done about persistent violator, and more of same has continued for more than a year. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 02:24, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
I don't know if a full CCI is warranted yet, but I've had to revert a lot of this users recent contribs (4 today alone) as direct copy/paste: Swarupskd.wiki. His talk page is loaded with copyright warnings in general for files, drafts, etc. His User-talk space edit count is zero. Crow Caw 22:47, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
One sock account out of many was the subject of a CCI. At least some other accounts have also engaged in copyright violations, and the likelihood is that many of them have done so. What's the best way of addressing the contributions of an editor who has copied material using multiple accounts? He's been prolific, so this could turn out to be a major project. (FYI: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ctway/Archive, Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Jetwave Dave, & Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Ose\fio) Rezin ( talk) 21:14, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
I can't find a definitive answer on links to copies of copyrighted material, what I believe are known as "courtesy links". Are they permitted in cases where the hosting website doesn't mention any permission from the copyright holders? It's come up in the case of a specific website to which many WP pages have citation links. links website discussion. Examples of their pages include: [6] [7] [8] Is it OK to keep links to these hosted articles? (Let me know if this is the wrong place to ask). Rezin ( talk) 19:51, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Folks, just a heads up that I strongly suspect the return of ItsLassieTime. Though a recent SPI failed, I have seen two other accounts that have a familiar behavioral pattern. My question here, pending evidence one way or the other as to an SPI, is if there is a way to watchlist contribs for copyvio before a whole bunch more articles are destroyed beyond recognition? This user's pattern includes making dozens of very small edits to articles (one word changes and then a save) and fixing it all is a nightmare. The dup detector checkers aren't real helpful here, either, as close paraphrasing is the problem more than copy and paste. Montanabw (talk) 05:31, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Folks, I'm not sure whether this is the right place to ask this question, but I'm hoping someone could help. I've just been listed for CCI violtions, and although I note from the page that if I disagree with the nomination I should say so, I'm not sure exactly how to do so - as in, on what page do I make my case? Can someone help? Thanks.
Fulleraaron ( talk) 22:52, 14 April 2015 (GMT)
Hi guys, I'm User:Huggi, is the investigation on me still pending, just wanted to ask because I never heard anything back from you guys. Thanks! -- huggi - never stop exploring ( talk) 06:52, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello all, a discussion regarding the fair use status of text within the Timed Text namespace is being held at Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content#Fair-use_status_of_Timed_Text, if you are interested please join the discussion there. Thank you, — xaosflux Talk 04:10, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
Will one of the clerks here open a case on Shootingstar88 ( talk · contribs)? See this section for detail. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 20:50, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
@ Psychonaut and Mkativerata: I'm interested in becoming a clerk here, as there seems to be only one active clerk. I have read the instructions on the instructions page. Most of my work with copyrights have been with images; however I understand all current copyright policies, for both images and articles. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 15:59, 20 January 2017 (UTC) Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 15:59, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
User:Psychonaut Sorry for the late response, didn't see this until I checked the talk page. I am looking for that now (I'm on phone so it may be a while). Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 16:01, 23 January 2017 (UTC) Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 16:01, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Well, one thing is for certain: we need all the help we can get! Iazyges, this is an area that requires a fairly detailed knowledge of our copyright policy and our ways of dealing with copyright problems. WP:SCV used to be a good place to acquire or refine some of that, but is no longer active. Unless anyone has a better idea, I'm going to suggest that you might spend some time at CopyPatrol and also work through a small CCI (or part of a bigger one) in an area that interests you. In either case, if you're not sure what to do, you can always list at WP:CP, or ask one of the tiny handful of admins with real knowledge and experience in this area. Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 19:08, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
For a long time now but I am not sure on all images but there were a fair number that I reported on wiki-commons that this editor uploaded which I knew were copyrighted material. This user I am sure is still doing that I wasn't sure how to report a case here (didn't want to mess up the main page!) and feel for the benefit of wiki to report him for a multitude of violation in uploading copyrighted photos. Govvy ( talk) 08:52, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
I have been going through the articles listed for this user and dealt with all the ones that had not been checked by other users, so the investigation could be closed. I found little wrong with the shorter ones but some close paraphrasing in a few of the longer ones. The problem mainly was that the amount of information in the sources used was limited and written in a rather stilted style, and our articles tended to use the same words because of lack of alternatives. Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 13:27, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I recently tagged an article as copyright violation and over the copyright issues encountered this site. This page has a massive backlog back to 2010 and is thus obviously not working. Removal of copyright violations, however, definitely has to work. A localized discussion here will simply not work so I will skip the steps at WP:RFC and make a RFC directly: How do we fix this backlog and make sure it doesn't come back again? Lurking shadow ( talk) 21:37, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
There is long-standing consensus that poking people on noticeboards is not helpful in dealing with backlogs (e.g. see any "AIV backlog" thread on ANI), and without a tangible proposal beyond "what should we do", that's essentially what this RfC is. Further, talk page discussions have generally not resolved workload issues in the past and I don't imagine they are about to now in one of the most poorly understood administrative areas on Wikipedia. I have removed this discussion from {{ Centralized discussion}} for the time being. TheDragonFire ( talk) 05:41, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
I fully agree with the basic tenet here – the backlog is unacceptably large, something has to change. Obviously that something is not just saying "oh well, 80000 potential copyvios unchecked, let's just archive them". Equally, we can't go on relying on a minuscule number of dedicated volunteers to deal with this, it is a community problem and needs the help of the full community to solve it.
I suggest we should look at the possibility of setting up a partially-automated process to start chipping away at it, perhaps something along the lines of what was used to deal with Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Darius Dhlomo (over 23000 articles). I'm not at all bot-literate, but tentatively: a bot tags (say) 200 articles a day with a new prod-type notice which can be removed by any extended-confirmed user once the page has been checked; after (say) a week, the bot notifies relevant WikiProjects of any page that still has the notice; after a further week, the page can be deleted (or not) by any admin, just like an expired prod. As I understand it, the Darius Dhlomo notice actually blanked the article in the same way that {{ copyvio}} does; that might be effective, but might also run into some strong objections.
Any thoughts? Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 11:28, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
but either we make this process permanent or the automatic removal and revision-deletion... depending on what works. Lurking shadow ( talk) 14:29, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Option 1:Delete all pages these copyright violators edited indiscriminately, unless they were checked off in CCI
Option 2:Prod and blank all pages these copyright violators edited(checked pages excluded) indiscriminately per bot(and then delete them after short notice)
Option 3:Manually revert to the last version and revision delete anything inbetween/speedy delete if it is the first version or otherwise speedily deletable.
(Option 4:Try to manage the backlog by individually examining every page.)
(Option 5:Do Nothing)
Option 1 is the quickest and safest method to deal with it, but also with the largest damage to genuine articles.
Option 2 may take longer and these things should be removed as fast as possible... but a few high value pages could possibly stay.
Option 3 will take significantly longer but the damage inflicted is lower(but still quite high)
Option 4 won't work because that's what's responsible for the backlog in the first place - it is too much work with not enough helpers.
Option 5 does not conform with our copyright policy and WP:PILLARS and is not legitimate. Lurking shadow ( talk) 07:00, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
As such, I support Option 1, maybe 2. Oppose Option 3(and 4 and 5)
The majority of the backlog are 'open investigations' which (as I understand it) is intended to be investigationn for copyvio, rather than cleaning up known copyvio. A bot could definitely assist with this process, by marking the % of copyvio'd edits (or marking which edits) are copyvios. Starting with editors with low edit counts may help, as it is impractical and probably quite time consuming to deal with editors that have a long edit record. Thoughts? -- Tom (LT) ( talk) 23:44, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Yes what you are saying is perfectly reasonable User:Tom (LT) but that is wholly different from Lurking Shadow wanting to run a bot that deletes or proddelete-tags all articles edited by all the copyright violators currently in the frontpage and if that means deleting 80,000 articles it would not be "the end of the world". Smeat75 ( talk) 13:58, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
FWIW here is the bot request I wrote on this topic ages ago. Didn't get any interest, but perhaps some bot operator now would be willing to pitch in. (Assuming that we could get the necessary number of queries for the Earwig tool.) Calliopejen1 ( talk) 19:39, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
Here. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 21:12, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi. I've tried to start helping out at Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/ItsLassieTime, but I'd like to make sure I am doing this right before going deeper. Can someone take a look? Thanks, -- DannyS712 ( talk) 02:06, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
{{subst:cclean|url= ADDRESS, INCLUDING "http://" |CCI= SomeUser }}
Could I have some assistance with the cleanup at Virginia Cooperative Extension? Some of it is obvious copyvios. Others are very close, while some I have had to dig around other to verify the information existed on different pages before Wikipedia. This is for Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Huskers110110. Thanks! -- MrLinkinPark333 ( talk) 19:36, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
I have seen that there is only 1 active clerk, And I would like step up and help here as a Clerk. I have been working Copyvios and CCI and I have not had any copyright problems. Any Supports or Opposes is welcome. Thanks, Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 19:02, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Hello. I have two questions relating to two CCIs:
Thanks! -- MrLinkinPark333 ( talk) 01:00, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
Hello. I was wondering if I did the attribution correctly (this is the first CCI i've done for attribution issues). So far, I've done 1950 in North Korea and 1972 in Iran for Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Jackninja5. Thanks! -- MrLinkinPark333 ( talk) 01:06, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
Hello again. Another question about attribution: when an article is copied from another wiki (i.e. Wikia/Fandom), the text is allowed to stay but attribution is required correct? While looking through Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Koala15, I came across a copy of Toy Story of Terror! where the plot is from this version of Fandom. Also, does the Copied template apply here or only to Wikipedia articles that copy other Wikipedia articles? Thanks! -- MrLinkinPark333 ( talk) 18:22, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello. There are some duplicate edits in the 2018 section of Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Almodaa when comparing to the first 83 articles in this CCI. Should I x the duplicates in the 2018 section and leave the first instances up for checking? Otherwise, it'd be covering the same articles twice. Examples of duplicates are Canada–Saudi Arabia relations, Elliott Broidy and United Arab Emirates. Thanks! -- MrLinkinPark333 ( talk) 02:16, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello. I was wondering if 213.149.159.237 should be added to the open CCI on Angel Angel 2. The IP was temporarily blocked in a recent SPI case related to this user. The reason why I'm asking is because their CCI is currently still open. I've checked the IP edits and haven't found any copyvios so far. Thanks! -- MrLinkinPark333 ( talk) 20:18, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
Hello. Thrres quite a bit of open requests on the CCI page that havent been decided whether a full CCI should be opened or not. Thougjt I leave a note here so they can be looked through. -- MrLinkinPark333 ( talk) 18:11, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Once again I would like to step up and become a CCI clerk. I think I earned the needed experience to become one. Best, Signed, The4lines |||| ( You Asked?) ( What I have Done.) 23:43, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello. Could CCI cases be updated to include socks from SPIs that have not already been included? For example: Wikipedia:Contributor_copyright_investigations/IWannaABillionaire is missing three socks that came from Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/KirkleyHigh/Archive plus IP addresses. Money already has some listed at User:Moneytrees/CCI Sort but I would want to be sure that all users with socks have their socks checked as well. If an indepth list is needed to show which ones are missing from each case, I can list them.
I also wonder if any more of the closed cases have socks besides the four that Money listed. A separate section could be made with Closed CCIs with socks that haven't been fully checked. Yes, I know it's making more work, but I feel that all should be checked. If all socks are already done like Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20130702 then they could be skipped. Thanks! -- MrLinkinPark333 ( talk) 20:09, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi. Is there a way to find out the file usage of images on WP.EN that were already deleted on Commons, such as for this one, for example? Any tool for that? Gun Powder Ma ( talk) 13:38, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
As {{
?}} looks like it may be deprecated, I've gone and created {{
WP:CCI/T}} that produces , a much better icon in my opinion. It also supports additional parameters. E.g.
Wow! . I made this because no other templates really look great for using. If people think this isn't needed, I'll be happy to
WP:G7 it. — Yours,
Berrely •
Talk∕
Contribs
18:49, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Wikipedia talk:Copyright violations § Template:Copyvio-revdel. (Apologies if this isn't the ideal place to put a notice; I'm not sure exactly which pages are generally watchlisted by copyright folks.) {{u|
Sdkb}}
talk
18:19, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Template talk:Copyvio-revdel § Changing the wording. —
Berrely •
Talk∕
Contribs
16:09, 4 August 2021 (UTC)