![]() | 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 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | → | Archive 23 |
As mentioned here [1]. Likely all their edits need going through. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 02:05, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Having edit-conflicted, I'm going to paste what I had originally written so I don't lose it. :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:58, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Source | Article |
---|---|
Since the time of the Second Vatican Council, the trend has been for Catholics to receive Confirmation later and later. Forty years ago, most Catholics were confirmed in the fifth or sixth grade. Thirty years ago, most were confirmed in seventh or eighth grade. In the last twenty years, Confirmation has moved to ninth and tenth grade. | Since the time of the Second Vatican Council, the trend has been for Catholics to receive Confirmation later and later. Forty years ago, most Catholics were confirmed in the fifth or sixth grade. Thirty years ago, most were confirmed in seventh or eighth grade. In the last twenty years, Confirmation has moved to ninth and tenth grade. |
Source | Article |
Originally, the Second District was an immensely valuable line, serving manufacturing and agricultural facilities through the San Gabriel Valley. However, longer trains always had difficulty climbing and descending the steep 2.2% grade at Arroyo Seco, between Pasadena and Los Angeles. Helper locomotives were often needed, making for inefficient operation. The still-used Third District opened in 1888, just a year after the Second District, and quickly took most long-distance freight traffic along its rails. The Second District and the Pasadena Depot became famous by the numerous transcontinental passenger trains that served it. At one point, up to 26 passenger trains went through Pasadena daily. To avoid the press in Los Angeles, many actors and other celebrities opted to make Pasadena their home train station, bringing to it an atmosphere and legacy of glitz and glamour. | Originally, the Second District was an invaluable line; it served manufacturing and agricultural businesses throughout the entire San Gabriel Valley. Unfortunately, the longer trains had great difficulty climbing the precipitous 2.2% grade at Arroyo Seco, between Pasadena and Los Angeles. Additional locomotives were often necessary, causing a more costly and less efficient operation. The still-used Third District opened in 1888, just a year after the Second District, and rapidly took over most of longer freight trains more efficaciously. The Second District and the Pasadena Depot became well known by the many transcontinental passenger trains that it served. Historically, up to 26 passenger trains went through Pasadena every day. In order to avoid the media in Los Angeles, many celebrities chose to use Pasadena as their main train station, bringing to it an ambience and legacy of the glamour of old Hollywood. |
source | article |
Julius Orton, a seventh generation descendant of Thomas.... serve as a guard for a pack train crossing the plains for Placerville, a booming California gold mining town. Finding no gold, Julius moved to Soquel, a lumber town near Santa Cruz, where he worked as a laborer and eventually developed his own herd of cattle. In 1859, accompanied by his wife and two small daughters, and driving a small herd of cattle, he walked more than 200 miles from the coast to a homestead along the Tule River southwest of Lindsay. Julius Orton became a part of Lindsay history in the 1880's when he took up a second 160 acre homestead on land adjacent to the property of Lewis and John Keeley, brothers who had homesteaded a few miles southwest of Lindsay in the mid 1870's. The "meat" of all this is that Julius Orton is credited with planting the first orange trees in the Lindsay district on his homestead, giving rise to the motto, "Central California's Citrus Center." | Julius Orton, a seventh generation descendant of Thomas, served as security for a pack train headed for Placerville, a booming California gold mining town, motivated by his futile search for gold. In 1859, with his wife and two small daughters, and driving a small herd of cattle, walked more than 200 miles from the coast near Sacramento, to a homestead along the Tule River, southwest of Lindsay. In the 1880s, Julius Orton homesteaded another (160 acre) piece of land bordering on the property of pioneers Lewis and John Keeley, brothers who had taken on a homestead just a few miles southwest of Lindsay in the mid 1870's |
source | article |
Media outlets define the idea of beauty. The size zero woman in a barely-there outfit with long, flowing hair appears on every ad page of every magazine. Close your eyes and you can picture her because her image has been burned into your brain. | Media outlets define the idea of beauty. The size zero woman in a barely-there outfit with long, flowing hair appears on every ad page of every magazine. Close your eyes and you can picture her because her image has been burned into your brain. |
source | article |
Rosemead spokeswoman Aileen Flores said city officials last month dedicated a future park site in Imperial's honor. Jay Imperial Park will eventually be situated in the Southern California Edison right of way near Garvalia Avenue and San Gabriel Boulevard. Construction on the park could began in as soon as six months. | Rosemead spokeswoman Aileen Flores said that in June 2011, city officials dedicated a future park site to honor six-time Mayor, the late Jay Imperial. Jay Imperial Park will be situated in the Southern California Edison right of way near Garvalia Avenue and San Gabriel Boulevard. Construction on the park will begin in 2012 |
There are currently requests for comment open on meta to create two new global groups. The first is a group for members of the OTRS permissions queue, which would grant them autopatrolled rights on all wikis except those who opt-out. That proposal can be found at m:Requests for comment/Creation of a global OTRS-permissions user group. The second is a group for Wikimedia Commons admins and OTRS agents to view deleted file pages through the 'viewdeletedfile' right on all wikis except those who opt-out. The second proposal can be found at m:Requests for comment/Global file deletion review.
We would like to hear what you think on both proposals. Both are in English; if you wanted to translate them into your native language that would also be appreciated.
It is possible for individual projects to opt-out, so that users in those groups do not have any additional rights on those projects. To do this please start a local discussion, and if there is consensus you can request to opt-out of either or both at m:Stewards' noticeboard.
Thanks and regards, Ajraddatz ( talk) 18:05, 26 October 2014 (UTC)Hi, the article Services marketing was tagged for copy-editing; I came across it whilst vetting articles for a GOCE drive event. I noticed the text has a high standard of written English and a dearth of references, so i searched using Google. The website http://www.managementstudyguide.com appears to be the source of the bulk of the article, particularly the pages http://www.managementstudyguide.com/services-marketing.htm and http://www.managementstudyguide.com/seven-p-of-services-marketing.htm, amongst others. The website claims copyright of the material but I'm uncertain whether it originated there, so i've tagged the article with {{ copypaste}} and reported my concerns here, per WP:COPYVIO. Thanks for your time. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 ( talk) 06:12, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
I have this strange issue and although I have some experience in writing and publishing I am new in wikipedia and I am very pondering for this issue which is happening in our local wikipedia in Greece. I hope my English are enough to clearly describe to you the right picture of the issue, otherwise feel free to ask me and I will try to clarify. It is important to know that all active admins in Greek wikipedia are more or less about 10 people, which they know each other most of them. I am trying to make some improvements and corrections in Greek topic for EEZ - Exclusive Economic Zone using strictly the United Nation web page and United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea which is there too, because many sources of the topic are newspaper link which are not much accurate. I am trying to make a strict translation without adding wording which may lead in change important meaning of the Convention. This is something that most of scientist do here concerning this Convention and if the y want later they are adding their private opinion. Some of them are writing book as in our case this book here: https://www.academia.edu/3645806/%CE%97_%CF%80%CE%B5%CF%81%CE%B9%CE%B2%CE%B1%CE%BB%CE%BB%CE%BF%CE%BD%CF%84%CE%B9%CE%BA%CE%AE_%CE%B4%CE%B9%CE%AC%CF%83%CF%84%CE%B1%CF%83%CE%B7_%CF%84%CF%89%CE%BD_%CF%83%CF%85%CE%BC%CE%B2%CE%AC%CF%83%CE%B5%CF%89%CE%BD_%CE%B5%CE%BE%CE%B5%CF%81%CE%B5%CF%8D%CE%BD%CE%B7%CF%83%CE%B7%CF%82_%CF%84%CF%89%CE%BD_%CF%80%CF%8C%CF%81%CF%89%CE%BD_%CF%84%CE%BF%CF%85_%CE%B4%CE%B9%CE%B5%CE%B8%CE%BD%CE%BF%CF%8D%CF%82_%CE%B2%CF%85%CE%B8%CE%BF%CF%8D
Although I use the original source from UN and I did refer the source I used in every paragraph (altough it is the same source) the admins keep say that the later book (the one with the url above) is protected with copyright and I cannot use the specific text, although that the translation is not exactly the same but in tree sentences you can understand how similar the translation of the same paragraph can be!
The original text that is used translated is here: ".... In 1945, President Harry S Truman, responding in part to pressure from domestic oil interests, unilaterally extended United States jurisdiction over all natural resources on that nation's continental shelf - oil, gas, minerals, etc. This was the first major challenge to the freedom-of-the-seas doctrine. Other nations soon followed suit...." ( http://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_historical_perspective.htm#Historical%20Perspective)
This is the original text from Convention which is used and it is free to use but admin keeps saying that is not allowed to use since that it is used in a later Greek book! How someone can take a free text and make it copyright and nobody else can use it?
So the admin keeps telling that this is copyright violation and delete all data and maps I enter. How this can be resolved? Any assistance will be highly appreciated.
The link of the topic is here: https://el.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%91%CF%80%CE%BF%CE%BA%CE%BB%CE%B5%CE%B9%CF%83%CF%84%CE%B9%CE%BA%CE%AE_%CE%9F%CE%B9%CE%BA%CE%BF%CE%BD%CE%BF%CE%BC%CE%B9%CE%BA%CE%AE_%CE%96%CF%8E%CE%BD%CE%B7
Compugraphs ( talk) 18:39, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your time. About the permission for the original I have contacted UN and I have been told to use it just add a disclaimer stating that “This is not an official UN translation." So there is no problem to use, the problem is that because somebody else translated and uploaded as their paper at academia.edu the wikipedia admin claims that this paragraphs belongs to them so although my translation is not exactly the same with the paper uploaded in academia.edu the admin keeps saying that it similar and cannot be used, in other words to explain it straitfully the paper uses context from US without stating that (so they do copyright violation) and when somebody else tranlsalte the same paragraph from UN the admin (who in my opinion he is not so much stupid as he wants to look) delete all article because does not accept that the master documents is UN (which anyway is older date) and we do have the permisiion fron them to use it... I hope I gave you the picture of what is going on.. Regarding the authorisation, I do not thing that needs special permission for the Greece wikipedia as long as somebody can understand the language, my self with the same login I can edit any topic in any language.... Compugraphs ( talk) 14:36, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Dear copyright experts: I came across an article, Dhianpur, to which a large copied section had been added. I removed it, but is there a need to redact the revisions which contain the copied text? I read the information on the project page here, but it has nested "unless" statements which aren't clear to me. Are there other conditions besides request by the copyright holder under which copyvio revisions should be hidden, or is my task done by reverting to a non-offending version? — Anne Delong ( talk) 12:26, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Even if direct infringement is found, however, it is unlikely that the editor and administrator flagging and removing copyright issues in the current article, but not necessarily in previous versions of the article, will be held liable for contributory infringement. Under contributory infringement, one who, (1) with knowledge, (2) induces, causes, or materially contributes to (3) copyright infringement, (4) but does not commit or participate in the infringing act may be held liable contributorily (5) if he or she had knowledge, or reason to know, of the infringement. The editor and administrator flagging and removing a copyright issue in a Wikipedia article are not likely to be held responsible for contributory infringement because they are likely not engaged in inducing, causing, or materially contributing to the infringement during the general course of removing or flagging content. Rather, in this capacity, the editor and administrator are working towards taking down instances of possible infringement they see and therefore are not actually contributing to the infringing activity.
Dear copyright experts: I came across an old AfC draft that had been edited by several people and then copy-pasted into mainspace, not by its originator. I decided to history-merge the two pages, which I did ( Artis (non-profit company); HOWEVER, I was careless enough not to notice that there were five edits relating to an old copyvio version which I should have left behind when I did the merge. Now the copyvio is in the history of the mainspace article (sigh). I thought I could just use WP:REVDEL to make these invisible. Is that okay? Or, since they were intended to be deleted, should I delete the page and restore all but those five? Or, should I delete the page, move the five offending edits back where I got them, delete them there, and restore the mainspace page without them? (messy) I promise to pay more attention in the future. — Anne Delong ( talk) 16:43, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
I am looking at expanding the copy and paste detection bot globally. Am looking at hiring staff to help. They will not only collect data on the size of the issue for publication but also edit Wikipedia. Are people here okay with that? Please join the discussion here. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 07:51, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Not sure this is the right place, but I'd appreciate the advice of someone knowledgeable about CC and related copyright issues in this discussion. Many thanks! -- Randykitty ( talk) 12:46, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure of how to deal with this: there is a new article with an unusual name, A47: Airflow Over Airplane Wing; its creator has made no other edits on WP and an article with the same name was deleted from Wikibooks earlier this month due to copyright violations (see here). YSSYguy ( talk) 01:31, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
- by admin - copyvio deleted from history.
My concern is with Lawrence Weiskrantz.... is it acceptable to copy and paste so much material that basically now makes up the bulk of the article? I think not but the edit was re-established by a third party because they are now using quotes and a link to the copyrighted page. I am concerned about this... pls See Lawrence Weiskrantz - Violation Suspected 80.2% for the text involved ( WP:Fairuse and WP:PD). -- Moxy ( talk) 03:44, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
It looks as if someone copy-and-pasted most of the "history" section of this, in 2005. See Talk:Saint-Antonin-Noble-Val. Pam D 23:38, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
User:Dcoetzee, the author of the contribution surveyor and duplication detector (I consider this superseded by [6]) tools, has been globally permabanned by the WMF. In the medium term, we should find a new maintainer for them. I have my own contribution surveyor, but it will not be a replacement (I cannot run it with my current hosting setup on Google App Engine, for a start). MER-C 03:23, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
I pinged Dcoetzee a few months back when the DD tool looked to be behaving oddly. He said then that he hadn't touched it in quite a long time, so as long as the tool is allowed to run, it should hopefully do so without much intervention. He did also say that it can essentially run anywhere, even on a home PC/Server properly equipped, so there's options there too. Crow Caw 19:29, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
I think it would be useful if the page contained a section with a brief description of the tools available and either links to the tools themselves or a link to Wikipedia:Wikimedia Labs/Toolserver replacements so that editors who become interested in copyright problems can be informed that such tool exist, and also to act as a news feature for editors who suddenly find that a tool they rely on no longer works. If such a section exists on another page then a prominent mention on the page of such a section on another page would help spread the information. Thoughts?-- PBS ( talk) 13:18, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
On January 6th, editor 93.146.99.156 added the entire plot text as distributed by The Weinstein Company to The Hateful Eight#Plot. The editor added some (incorrect) internal links, removed the first four words, and moved one comma, but that's it. You can find this plot text, for example, here and here. After the editor did this, the Plot section has barely been changed. -- 82.136.210.153 ( talk) 16:48, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
We have expanded EranBot as a pilot to look at a wider range of topics (all of English Wikipedia).
We have the output tagged by WikiProject. The hope is to eventually make the list sortable with a drop down box to specific WikiProjects.
We are also looking at methods to make it easier to indicate which have been dealt with and will need to figure out some auto archiving of concerns once they are addressed.
Still a work in progress. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 17:09, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
My issue is copyvio links in iamages. If you see [7] realhistoryww.com/ is linked in a number of images. I've looked at this website and it has quite a few full copies of newspaper articles, articles from the BBC website, etc, so as I understand it we should have no links to it. Thanks Dougweller ( talk) 12:18, 8 January 2015 (UTC) This comment by Dougweller moved here from Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2015 January 8. Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 23:54, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
It seems that in December 2003, user Olivier created Tai Mo Shan "based on information provided by the Hong Kong Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) [of the Government of Hong Kong], under the provision that the re-dissemination or reproduction is for non-commercial use". (The article has been significantly expanded since then, but a lot of the original text remains.) Would this be a copyright violation (since Wikipedia doesn't allow non-commercial)? I'm not sure if it was a copy-paste, given that the department's current page bears little resemblance to it; but the attribution implies that some content was reproduced. (The earliest revision is reminiscent of an advertisement encouraging people to visit.) Jc86035 ( talk • contributions) 10:22, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
I have put the rewrite in place. Thank you, Olivier. Jc86035, fortunately all we need for attribution is a list of authors. We can hide the text without compromising that. In this case, however, I'm not sure we need to do that. We do not always remove copyright issues from the histories of articles. Given the proportion here, I don't know that it's necessary. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:09, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Are EPA documents, I.e this onein the public domain? If not there is a problem since 2006 at Onsite sewage facility. TMCk ( talk) 23:07, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
I've just taken a look at the 2015 Four Continents Figure Skating Championships page after editing some few hours ago and I noticed that the newly added prose in the recap section seemed familiar. A quick Google search confirms that the text has mostly been copied from the official ISU website, which I read earlier in the day. The text was added by 122.106.242.42 ( talk · contribs). When I checked their prior contributions, I noticed that they have added similar prose sections to the 2014 Four Continents Figure Skating Championships and 2013 Four Continents Figure Skating Championships. I haven't check them against the ISU website yet, but I fear they too are copyright violations. At the very least, the prose and quotes are not attributed to any sources. I was just wondering if removing the prose and placing {{ Cclean}} on the talk page was the best course of action? I was planning on warning the IP with {{ uw-copyright}} too. Any advice would be appreciated. - JuneGloom07 Talk 01:29, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
There's discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 February 4#Category:Creative Communism License about renaming some categories for Wikipedians. The discussion would benefit from advice from someone knowledgeable about copyright. Or, if there's a better place to find an editor with that expertise please let me know. DexDor ( talk) 07:28, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Hopefully this is the correct place to put this. I was looking at the article Tudor Hall School, Banbury and the style of it felt too promotional. I got suspicious, so took at look at the school's website and found that the pastoral, sports, and extra curricular sections have been copy-and-pasted from there into the article. Other bits of the article may have been pasted as well, I didn't check thoroughly. -- 82.4.111.110 ( talk) 18:02, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Hey all, Just a note that I switched Duplication Detector and Contribution Surveyor to an upgraded version of the operating system (Ubuntu) and code engine (PHP) it runs on. This should have no effect on any use of the tool, however if you DO notice issues please let me know so that I can revert until I have time to troubleshoot. Jalexander-- WMF 23:39, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
The one sentence body of this stub article, Batter board, is taken word for word from the referenced link, a building construction glossary: http://www.oldhouseweb.com/how-to-advice/backhand-to-butt-joint.shtml. I tagged the page with a copy-paste template and notified the originating editor, the one who entered it. This seems not to be the first time the editor has done this. This is the first time I've dealt with a copyright violation. If I have botched the operation, please let me know. Thank you, Wordreader ( talk) 18:19, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
This article states "Based on original text by Peter Kemp, The Johann Strauss Society of Great Britain. Used with permission". There is no citation of where the original text comes from, or any evidence of permission having been sought or given. The article has no in-line citations, and doesn't seem to have been significantly edited since 2004. It seems to me therefore to contravene WP:COPYVIO - am I right? Thanks, -- Smerus ( talk) 11:22, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
At the bottom of Lightweight Telephony Protocol is a manually-entered copyright notice ( permalink). I'm not familiar with the finer points of Wikipedia's copyright policies, but this looked a little strange to me. — danhash ( talk) 00:30, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
http://www.bollywoodhungama.com/ad_overlay.php Does any contributor with copyright knowledge of this site? I have had a cursory look around it but found no copyright status. I have recently removed a couple of what were in my opinion clear copyright violations from this page Kashish Singh and one contributor is seemingly insistent in posted one. They are all on wiki, commons and I have no edits there. This is the current inserted photo. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kashish-Singh-at-the-launch-of-Blenders-Pride-Tour-2013.jpg Govindaharihari ( talk) 15:15, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
The new and improved copy and detection bot that we at WP:MED have been using for nearly a year is nearly ready to be expanded to other topic areas.
It can be found here [10]. If you install the common.js code it will give you buttons to click to indicate follow up of the concerns.
Additionally one can sort the edits in question by WikiProject. We are working to set up auto-archiving such that once concerns are dealt with they will be removed from the main list.
We also want to have automatic compilation of data such as the frequency of true positives and false positives generated by the bot. A blacklist of sites that are know mirrors of Wikipedia is here [11]. As this list is improved / expanded the accuracy of the bot will improve. Many thanks to User:ערן for his amazing work.
Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 09:00, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
I have raised a new issue at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2015 April 11 but am not sure that it is going to get serviced. Am I right in thinking that entries here are automated from page tagging? The issue concerns the reference desk and I don't really want to tag that page. Spinning Spark 16:55, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
The link to the "author" is here. This person has several e-books available on Google which are nothing but HTML lifts of WP articles. There is an attribution in the books that they are GNU Free Licensed and taken from Wikipedia, but I think I take issue with the claiming of authorship of all these different books by this one person, which is definitely not true. Additionally, because of the direct lifting, all the pictures including material we have as fair use, are being reproduced for profit (and thus used without permission. The Art of Movies in particular may be reproducing images from the various articles on Bishojo, etc, which may be non-free. These are all fairly sizable 1000+ page items, so I can't really sift them myself. MSJapan ( talk) 06:28, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
As Wgolf mentioned, OpenHistory is used as a source for 60 articles. The copyright of OpenHistory states
"You may copy and distribute the Document in any medium, either commercially or noncommercially, provided that this License, the copyright notices, and the license notice saying this License applies to the Document are reproduced in all copies, and that you add no other conditions whatsoever to those of this License"
I don't think we use a "GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.1 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation", and I'm not sure if Wikipedia's terms count as added conditions, but if it is, should this not be removed from the articles it's used in? (Eg OpenHistory page [13]) Thanks, 1Potato2Potato3Potato4 ( talk) 07:22, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
At The Age of Adaline I've just removed the third copyvio plot summary in about as many days. There's already a {{ Copyvio plot}} template on the talk page which doesn't seem to be a sufficient deterrent. I looked around and found {{ Copyright editnotice}}, but that doesn't seem to be correctly formatted as an edit notice (it appears as a permanent banner on the page). Would this be a useful addition to our arsenal, and if so could some kind admin or template editor fix it? Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 09:11, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Could I possibly get some assistance from someone with more copyright knowledge than me? We have a page that is a cut&paste from another source. But it has been removed from the other source, and all that is left is a Google cache. But that's enough to show that it was first published at the other site, which does have copyright notices on the site. OTOH, the submitter is quite possibly the same person/organization that submitted to the other site in the first place. And I also have concerns that they actually have control over the other site, making it difficult for them to do either of the normal methods of proving that they have the authority to submit the material. The author says that the material is in the public domain, but I saw no notice of such at the original location of publication. Communication has taken place at the page linked above, on the talk page of the author, and via private email, though I generally try to avoid conducting project business off-wiki. I need someone more experienced to step in and evaluate the situation. Am I possibly off-base calling it a copyright situation? If not, how can we help the author to prove that they have the ability to submit the text as public domain? And none of that gets to the fact that the text in question is IMHO an unencyclopedic wall of text. Sigh. - TexasAndroid ( talk) 18:13, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia user Bikeroo has made posts on early association football players, using information copied from the book 'First Elevens: the birth of international football' by Andy Mitchell. As author of this book I believe this is in breach of copyright, even with reference tags - the detailed information is not available elsewhere, and the reproduction of this information goes far beyond 'fair usage'.
Examples include these pages: Alexander Nash, Giulio Cowley Smith. There are others.
This kind of behaviour is detrimental to researchers like myself, whose work is being copied and distributed for free.
Kvaratschelia 13:43, 30 March 2015
{{subst:copyvio|url=''First Elevens: the birth of international football'' by Andy Mitchell}}
at the beginning of the copied material and </div>
at the end. You'll then need to follow the instructions on the resulting template.Thanks for your response but I have to disagree with your definition of copyright and fair usage. You are effectively saying it is OK to lift detailed information from a book, so long as you change the order of the words. I stand by my earlier comments, and add that after challenging Wikipedia user Bikeroo about this behaviour, he/she decided to retire from Wikipedia - an admission of guilt if ever there was one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kvaratschelia ( talk • contribs) 18:38, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Do links to sources need to be ones that do not infringe copyrights/cause the user to infringe copyrights? For example, the link provided for "The Salmon of Doubt…" by Margulies on fMRI would appear to infringe copyright since the source is normally only available through authorized channels; should the link be removed? I have yet to see where this is directly addressed by existing policies, although I would remove it as a courtesy to Wikipedia (to prevent DMCA notices) and users (to prevent unintentional copyright infringement, at least in the US). In general, do sources need to be legal/legally accessible/not pose a threat to the user? -- ChrstphrChvz ( talk • contribs) 03:18, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
This one has me confused, in part because even our own templates are vague. We've got a bunch of newly created articles sending CorenBot into a frenzy. They're articles on the various amendments and related material on India's constitution. They would seem to fall under
Template:PD-India as laws/acts-of-legislature, though that template also includes the caution: This file may not be in the public domain outside India. The creator and year of publication are essential information and must be provided.
The constitution itself dates to 1949, with numerous amendments up through 2009. So: is the text of these amendments, which is PD in India, considered PD here or a copyvio? Pinging
Hut 8.5 who's also investigated some of these on SCV.
Crow
Caw
22:26, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
This article needs urgent attention. Two editors, Folks at 137 ( talk · contribs) and Philipnelson99 ( talk · contribs) are re-inserting text copied from [15]. Nigel Ish ( talk) 17:06, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
This article has no references. Much of it reads like a press release and searching for the second paragraph of this section I found it verbatim in this WHO document. I have tagged the article, but do not know how to take care of copyvio's other than deleting them, so I am mentioning the article here. Thanks. μηδείς ( talk) 02:51, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
On the main WP:CP page. New dates will no longer appear at the bottom, and as old dated get moved to the "Older than 5 days" section, it will only get worse! Any help clearing the old days' CP and SCV's will be most appreciated. Pie on request even! Crow Caw 16:02, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
The History section of Downtown Las Vegas sure reads like a copyvio, and sure enough it's very similar to text from the book "Ultimate Handbook Guide to Las Vegas : (United States)." Problem is the material was added June 2014, and the book was published October 2014. Maybe there was an earlier edition? Would a travel book copy from WP without attribution? Kendall-K1 ( talk) 14:22, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
I came across an article which had copied content from another article (which I first mis-identified as an external copyvio, but seems to be the other way around: content forked from Wikipedia). For such cases, is it sufficient to note the revision from which it was taken in an edit summary of the pages the content, or do we have any templates to tag that on the receiving page's talkpage? 92.64.31.85 ( talk) 12:02, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Dear copyright experts: Some time ago, an editor made a draft copy of Nagla Murli at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Nagla murli and then added an infobox. I have moved the infobox to the mainspace article, as the only useful edition, leaving an edit summary crediting the editor who created it. Is it necessary to now redirect this draft to the mainspace article to preserve the attribution of the infobox? It's strictly data, with no composition of sentences or design work. Or can the draft just be deleted? — Anne Delong ( talk) 17:56, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
TL;DR : Can a Category violate copyright ?
There's plenty of advice on the copyright of text and of images, but none that I can find on categories.
I picked up St Mary's Church, Haddenham at new page patrol and, by way verifying its notability, added a ref :
Would a category, say Category:Jenkin's 1000 best churches, to include those churches violate his copyright? I'm guessing that creating a Wikipedia:Books probably would.
Similarly, for the Baedeker guides, especially in light of the Baedeker raids? Or Pevsner for Pevsner Architectural Guides?
I'm not 100% sure I want to create the category yet, but I am sure I don't want to unwittingly blunder into copyvio. Thanks. Bazj ( talk) 11:36, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
Dear copyright experts: In the case listed here: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Appsolutely everything/GetJar, it seems that there has been copying within Wikipedia, but I'm not sure that merging the histories is the right thing to do, because the text in question was previously deleted from the article as too promotional. Can someone who has dealt with this situation before please comment on the page? Thanks.— Anne Delong ( talk) 02:58, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Looks like User:Mahdisney is copy-pasting into multiple articles e.g. [16] but there are many more. 82.132.215.107 ( talk) 14:05, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Additional eyes are needed at the Flitfire article. User:Cubgirl4444 is reinserting text copied from [17], despite warning on the article talk page and on their talk page. Just to make things more difficult, the article in question is in the middle of an afd discussion, with the content in question also having been added to (and removed from) the Piper J-3 Cub article. I don't know whether some sort of revdel is needed. Nigel Ish ( talk) 17:58, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Response: first article... nomination for deletion within an hour or two of page creation. Didn't know about a sandbox. Was trying to create a historical article. Nigel Ish claimed he was no longer active user on his user page & then was deleting all my work. It was confusing. I think Newbie's do get a little slack here. Most people who are new don't want to break rules; they just don't understand things at first. No need for everyone to act like the Gestapo. A friendly word will go a lot farther than harsh barking.
P.S. It took me a couple of hours to figure out the "talk" thing. It's not very intuitive & may have appeared that I was ignoring messages, at first. Sending an email would've gotten an immediate response.
Cubgirl4444 ( talk) 01:05, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello. I've raised the question at the non-free content talk page regarding whether consensus exists to allow an exception to our prohibition against including the complete or extensive quotation of the lyrics of non-free songs in the case of national anthems. Guidance on this is currently somewhat contradictory. If you have an opinion on the matter, your feedback there would be welcome! -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:28, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
I deleted the above as a copyvio of a web page with a copyright notice, however as another editor has pointed out to me, the page suggests that it is a transliteration of The Catholic Encyclopedia from 1907. So what is the situation here - should we have an article that is a straight copy from another source (and, indeed, reads like someone's personal opinion)? Should I send it to AfD for further opinion? Black Kite (talk) 23:20, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
While checking out two SCV entries that were internal copies of this article, and since I'm just returning from a long absence, I would like to get a sense from others on what they think about the edits performed by an IP on March 22nd. Specifically the amount of fully wikified text and the interval between time stamps. I'm too out of practice to be a good judge. Thanks. MLauba ( Talk) 22:49, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Dear copyright experts: I tried to tag the page Draft:Global Management Accounting Principles as a copyright violation of http://www.academia.edu/11433654/TRUST_VALUE_RELEVANCE_INFLUENCE, using Twinkle, but was unable to do so because of "invalid token". Did I do something wrong? or is there something special about this page?— Anne Delong ( talk) 01:39, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Does anyone mind if I update {{ CPC}} to be more in line with other administrative board response templates (e.g. {{ AIV}}, {{ ANEW}}, {{ RFPP}} etc.)? Specifically, I'd like to remove the indentation, bullet, and signature, because the current formatting makes it difficult to respond to nested complaints. See history of Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2014 December 21 for an example). — Darkwind ( talk) 02:54, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
::{{RFPP|p|2 days}} ~~~~
or ::{{AIV|ani}} ~~~~
versus {{subst:CPC|c}}
. Admittedly not everyone who works this board is an admin, or even if they are, they may not regularly contribute at these other boards, so if the current template is what people are used to in their workflow, that's fine and I don't want to disrupt that. Rather than change the main template to suit my workflow, I'll probably just fork a copy at another name somewhere without the formatting. —
Darkwind (
talk)
18:25, 2 August 2015 (UTC)--~~~~
. For people like myself who have put an em-dash or other punctuation at the start of their signature specifically to avoid typing --~~~~
all the time, it ends up looking a bit ridiculous (--—
Darkwind (
talk) for example). —
Darkwind (
talk)
18:29, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
Please see User talk:XXzoonamiXX#Copying within Wikipedia. I was alerted to on inter-article copy because of the tell-tail failure to copy over a long citation in the references section to support short citations in the copied text. So far so usual. However, as can be seen in User talk:XXzoonamiXX#Copying within Wikipedia, I have added two other other examples of the same text being inserted into multiple articles, these may be (probably are) examples of text originally added to one article by XXzoonamiXX and then added into other articles. Could some other editors, who are more experienced than I am at this sort of thing, have a look and give further guidance to XXzoonamiXX if that is thought necessary. -- PBS ( talk) 18:05, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
I had added some material to the B'Tselem page from their "About us" website: "B'Tselem is funded by contributions from foundations in Europe and North America that support human rights activity worldwide, and by private individuals in Israel and abroad". I cannot see any copyright notice on the page, it seems weird to me that the "About us" page would be copyrighted, and also the text seems very short to me. But another user flagged it as a copyvio. What is the opinion about this? I have rewritten the text anyway, but I would like to know for the future. Kingsindian ♝ ♚ 10:38, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
I added several section {{ Copypaste}}s to Faith healing. Google Book searches show block of identical text in two sources ( this and this). Both look like they are self-published and are not found in worldcat. Both do not show a copyright page in Google Books preview. I don't know how to determine if those books are the sources copied into Wikipedia or if Wikipedia is the source without that copyright information to look through the article history to see what came first. What can I do? – BoBoMisiu ( talk) 18:24, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
The page Tactile imaging is a confusing tangle of possible copyright violations and conflict of interest, and it's a little beyond me. There is significant overlap with this article, complete with awkward language suggestive of a non-native English speaker. The article, along with several other publications with V. Egorov as an author that are cited in Tactile imaging, seems to be the basis for much of the article, so it is probably no coincidence that most of the article has been written by Egorov123. Note that the link above is to a draft in the US National Library of Medicine, much of which is public domain, but the final edited form is published in Current Medical Imaging Reviews. Similarly, many of the figures ( File:Figure2TI.png, File:Figure3TI.png File:Figure4TI.png, File:Figure5TI.png , are copies of figures from this article. In Wikipedia Commons the source is given as "own work", which they may well have been originally, but now I presume that the journal owns them. In addition, contributions to other articles by Egorov123 seem closely related to the research interests of V. Egorov. RockMagnetist( talk) 22:06, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Response from Vladimir Egorov: It seems to me that the expertise of RockMagnetist does not allow him/her to make judgments neither about the scientific description of the innovative technology nor about the published article language. I wrote the page Tactile Imaging based on my scientific knowledge and referenced publications. All used figures are my own. The page is open for improvements. Sometimes, I contribute into the wiki and other pages which have intersections with my scientific interests and I see that the page was written by a post-doc servant with an intellect of a kindergarten children. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:8B:C300:4A00:1C02:6AD7:F0A4:E50D ( talk) 18:06, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
How many entries from a dictionary can be quoted at one article (or its talk page) before this is a copyright issue? Does it matter if they're quote in full or in part? Does it matter if they're quoted in one or multiple citations? By different editors? In a single edit? In different threads/sections? — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 03:56, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
Dear copyright experts: This old draft User:Kvasconez/sandbox appear to be a copy of an article sponsored by a government department, rather than a policy document or other official publication. Is this copyright?— Anne Delong ( talk) 15:35, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
The long list of errors in the current version of the article Neuromuscular junction disease brought me to this diff by an IP from more than a year ago: [18]. I can see this as being a potential copyright problem on two fronts; first the large amount of text is not properly sourced, and I guess it has been copied from somewhere else within wikipedia without proper attribution. I do not know the proper forum for addressing such a concern, so I am posting it here. Regards, AtHomeIn神戸 ( talk) 06:07, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
I created this template because finding and removing the correct </div> template once the copyright violation is resolved may be tricky on pages that already had </div> on them when {{subst:copyvio|....}} was placed on the page.
The template expands to </div>. The only reason I made it is so that it "stands out" on a page and is therefore easy to spot and remove once the copyright issue is resolved. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs) 05:18, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Dear experts,
I was reading the page on Young-adult_fiction when I noticed a lot of unusual citations, such as "(Cart 43)." I did a little googling and found that most of the text was lifted directly from http://community.worldheritage.org/articles/Young_adult_literature, with some minor variation in text up until 15 March 2013 when it was edited to match the source text directly. Unless I'm getting it backwards, and the encyclopedic reference copied Wikipedia first, shouldn't this be fixed post-haste?
Best regards, 2602:306:B8ED:DE0:6D56:DFAA:A791:43F4 ( talk) 23:45, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Following the community indef and ban of Billy Hathorn I attempted to start a discussion of (1) what to do about his contributions (2) what to do about the CCI backlog and (3) whether the community wants to ask the Foundation to look into better and more robust ways of dealing with long-term abuse. The discussion got archived before it had really had time to get started, so I'm trying again here. Leaving aside 2 and 3 for now, I believe we need to try to reach a decision on what should be done about Hathorn's contribs. In that brief discussion, Nyttend made this proposal:
I know that it's a huge amount of text, but I'm still in favor of nuking all articles created by him and not significantly edited by others. The first step would be bot deletion of all articles never edited by other users, aside from bot edits and human edits that were marked as minor. This done, the bot could give a full list of articles that had fewer than X non-minor edits by humans (I'll suggest five), and admins could go through the list to check for non-minor edits, marking ones that had been checked and cleared. Once these were done, the bot would give us a list of all other articles created by him, and we'd repeat the delete-or-mark process. Splitting up the process would both make it easier to do (simply by making more-but-smaller chunks of work) and make it so that we got the more-likely-to-be-problematic articles first. The time-related problem at CCI is that you're supposed to check each article individually against the potential sources, if I remember rightly. If we're deleting everything that's not gotten significant contributions from other editors (by which I'm meaning major rewrites, not just significant content additions), we don't need to worry about checking contents: a few seconds would suffice to check virtually all articles, and the exceptions would involve checking just a few diffs. I'd suggest that the bot handle all deletions, including ones that had been checked and cleared for deletion. Two process points: (1) Bot uses an edit summary reading something like "Deleting page created by user with an extensive history of copyright infringement. Page may be recreated by any user", because we don't want to discourage people from creating new articles on the same topics. (2) Bot's userspace has a fully protected page on which admins can leave a list of links, and the bot deletes every article that's linked from this page. This would potentially save us a ton of time (you can check twenty pages and copy/paste their names much faster than you can check them and delete them) as well as ensuring a consistent edit summary. Since the deletions requiring human checking would be bot-performed on human instructions, we wouldn't need to worry about WP:CONTEXTBOT.
There were comments in support from MER-C and Blackmane, and a question from Rich Farmbrough. Are there objections to this, better solutions, or technical or other reasons why it can not now go ahead? I'd like to suggest that it be supplemented with a "Darius Dhlomo" warning tag for all articles that are not summarily deleted, to avoid the possibility of good-faith editors working on corrupt content that will later have to be removed. Pinging Moonriddengirl, Wizardman, Diannaa, Hut 8.5, Psychonaut and Crow for comment. Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 23:05, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
I was wondering if someone would mind taking a look at Samba district#Name origin. The entire section looks as if it's been copied and pasted (including citation markers) from somewhere. The entire section is unsourced, so simply removing it per WP:NOR is one possibility; However, I'm not sure if that would be sufficient if it's really a copyvio. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 21:45, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
Would I be able to get a second opinion on Power distance? A lot of the writing style seems like an essay, but I can't find any non-mirror matches for the literal snippets that I've searched (e.g. "Hofstede, the famous business anthropologist, developed the controversial cultural dimensions theory.", "In the middle of the last century, Haire, Ghiselli, and Porter"). I'm not sure if anyone has access to any more automated tools to check the article more wholly, as it's quite long.
The vast majority of the article was added in this edit by a user named User:MGMT90018 2015S2 Power distance, which is a little unusual. Looking at the history of the sandbox version beforehand, it seems as if it is a collaborated article (perhaps as part of a college course or something), so it may just need a bit more wikifying, but I wanted to be sure that the article is alright before I spend any major time on cleanup. Thank you. — Sasuke Sarutobi ( talk) 14:25, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Hermelin: The Detective Mouse is a newly created article that has been tagged as a possible copyvio by
User:CorenSearchBot. The
copyvios report shows an 88% match with the website
www
There is this article which does not meet the basic Wikipedia criteria failing WP:N. One of the major violations is also copyright. I have also listed the sources of copyright in detail. If there is an admin here. Please delete it. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hari Parbat. It has more than 6 sources of copyright. Markangle11 ( talk) 15:51, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Please re-check and read my comments. Markangle11 ( talk) 16:39, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
I am concerned that some of the text in the article may be copied from [19]. SovalValtos ( talk) 19:15, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
The blamer is a fundamental tool for tracking down copyvio, but for several months (at least) has consistently given wrong results (Example: ask it who added "a typical face-off" to Premier Badminton League and it replies with this diff; the text was actually added two years earlier, with this edit). The maintainers are listed as Cyberpower678, Hedonil, MusikAnimal, Technical 13 and TParis; I'm pretty sure that neither of the last two has been active for some time now. If any of the remaining three has the time, will and energy to see what's gone wrong and fix it, that would be excellent. But if they don't, could we get some help with getting this back on its feet? Jalexander-WMF, I remember that you stepped in when the DupDetector and Contribution Surveyor seemed to be at risk; might you consider looking at this too? Or anyone else with the necessary skills, for that matter. Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 10:21, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
See Talk:Sausmarez Manor#Copyright concerns. I have no direct evidence that the article breaches copyright because the source does not appear onlne, but experience suggests, that a new editor creating an article over 10k in size from a single source is likely to have inadvertently breached copyright, particularly when the wording seems so polished. I am placing this comment here so that there is a record of my concern, in this central repository and in the hope that others will take a look and seen if my concerns are ill-founded. -- PBS ( talk) 14:01, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
A large part of Bureau of Diplomatic Security, the "Personnel" section, appears to have been copy-pasted from the Bureau's official website. -- AW ( talk) 04:11, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
I have run across a user who has clearly plagiarized in mainspace, and now it appears that he has also done so in userspace, though I can not find a clear rule saying userspace is included. That editor appears to not regard copyright as a serious issue, and has "banned" me from any contact, and I abide by his wishes. Advice? Collect ( talk) 08:40, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Please read its Talk Page, the sections Liberia and Native Americans for the editing and administrative context.
The reverted version that I want to discuss heretobelow is here.
In short, when using the exact wording from the main History of Liberia article, and adding WP:RS sources thereto, with their full attribution and the quotes tag, I was being accused of WP:OR, as presumably these sources did not contain the key "racial segregation" phrase (they did, in fact). While rewording the content, having found even better sources, and quoting directly therefrom as part of the sentence/fragment only, so as to avoid e.g. WP:SYNTH, my edits were administratively reversed for, quote:
Revert copyright violations. The statement on talk page of "verbatim" copying appears to be an admission of copyright violation, though it's is not very clear. But I can tell this material re: Liberia preexists & is indeed b/c part of it is found verbatim at https://laurenkfoster.wordpress.com/2015/02/04/bhm-1-liberia/
Now, when asked how to solve the "damned if I do, damned if I don't" (see the Talk below), the further advice given by the same experienced editor was:
To fix such a thing would involve citing sources that do, which in no way necessitates copying and pasting their content. This is all entirely separate from the copyright issue that drew me here.
I am none the wiser.
1. Did I really commit a copyright violation that may have contributed to the WP:ANI sanctions against me?
2. How does one know if smb's blog content from 2015-02 was copied from the stable Wikipedia article (from which I copied the content in turn, as per above, as previously advised on the Talk Page), and not the other way round?
I hope my query is clear, as it is a somehow complicated to explain. It is also long-term problem for me, as an Wikipedia editor with some experience behind my ears, as I am accused of not being competent therefore by hopping IPs.
Zezen ( talk) 15:53, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Here is a copyright deletion that needs more legal opinions at deletion-review: Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2016 January 2 is a Feist Publications, Inc., v. Rural Telephone Service Co. issue. It involves the choosing of two possible birth dates to display for a single entry in a table of birth dates. Choosing one over the other makes the whole table commentary and makes the whole list copyrightable. The deleter claims that he is a lawyer and has the ability to make the determination. -- Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) ( talk) 00:47, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
only noticed one sentence, but it *is* word for word. Added this to talk page of article:
"However, large-scale religious conversions did not occur until the reign of Ahmad Bakr (1682–1722), who imported teachers, built mosques, and compelled his subjects to become Muslims." https://books.google.com/books?id=oN5LbDnKCt4C&pg=PA55&lpg=PA55 word for word not sure which came first Elinruby (talk) 06:29, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
haven't really looked into how to determine what to do with these; I am there because it's flagged as needing other help. Noting the issue here so someone else can take a look. Elinruby ( talk) 06:35, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Today's featured article Bruce Kingsbury - both the introduction and the main page teaser - use barely changed text from the official citation following his posthumous award of the Vicoria Cross:
Honestly I don't know the copyright rules here in detail. Probably this official wartime text is in the public domain. But still I think it's at least somewhat improper to use text parts in this way, and neither a role model of NPOV. Or is it consensus that this practice is alright? -- KnightMove ( talk) 21:49, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
I was reading "Quantitative Measurement of Scores by Ranks" by Gayatri and Prasad and noticed substantial similarities in the text describing the Spearman's rank correlation coefficient and this wikipedia entry. The text above is a conference paper from the "2011 International Conference on Advancements in Information Technology" and can be accessed HERE. (scroll down to the section on the Spearman CC for the text in question.
The following text from the Gayatri publication is a perfect match with the current wikipedia text:
"In statistics, Spearman's rank correlation coefficient or Spearman's rho, named after Charles Spearman and often denoted by the Greek letter ρ (rho) or as rs, is a non-parametric measure of statistical dependence between two variables. It assesses how well the relationship between two variables can be described using a monotonic function. If there are no repeated data values, a perfect Spearman correlation of +1 or −1 occurs when each of the variables is a perfect monotone function of the other."
The text in question dates from 2011, and the wiki article text is present in the history prior to this date.
216.15.21.56 ( talk) 21:18, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
For Rankings of universities in the United Kingdom#Summary of National Rankings, there is a third column stating the number of times the university appears in the top 10 in one of the three league tables. This draws on partial data from one source (Times/Sunday Times Good University Guide) which has a DMCA takedown notice, so is copyright violated? The column does not exactly state what position they are within the top 10 or whether if they are in the top 10 at all for that ranking (the university is included in the table if it is in the top 10 of either of the 3 rankings), only general statements are made regarding if they are in the top 3/5/10 for all 3 league tables or not. EmyRussell ( talk) 06:05, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
Is it okay to copy headwords, those which are red links in WP, from an astronomy dictionary onto a Wikipedia page in order to make a redlist? Iceblock ( talk) 20:58, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mt10.jpg - Copy from internet ( [25])
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gdp_1960.png - Copy from google book Banzaku ( talk) 10:00, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
The article Coal Wars, specifically this edit by an anonymous editor, copied and pasted directly from this website: http://www.gutenberg.us/articles/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain. Subsequently the same editor edited the material into the current form. My question is if this is a copyright problem (the website mentions the material is Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License) and if so is the current Coal Wars article sufficiently different enough or should it be removed.
Thanks - Killian441 ( talk) 17:54, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
I just came across Kaufering concentration camp which is mostly copy-paste from here http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10006171. Now, there are some pages that use USHMM content with permission (eg Chelmno) but there is no indication of that here... Drow69 ( talk) 13:50, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
I want to make a detailed content of Euclid's Elements book 1 article as hub to link to and from many other articles.
When I did that the first time it was marked as being copyrighted by another and speedely deted see:
As being copyrighted by http://aleph0.clarku.edu/~djoyce/java/elements/bookI/bookI.html.
But what is the exact copyright status of this work and can I reuse the content in an article in wikipedia
The original is Euclid's Elements (circa 300 BC, I guess out of copyright) in ancient greek. the now a days most used english translation is the one of Thomas Little Heath's (5 October 1861 – 16 March 1940) "The thirteen books of Euclid's Elements" (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1908) this version is still printed and sold by Dover books (and also by other publishers, see the Euclid's Elements article.
I really would like to use larger parts of this book, the book is mentioned at https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Elements_of_Euclid There are other translations mentioned but they just use not the same translations and using them is likely to cause confusion.
I am wondering if this is the right place to discuss this problem , I was send here by a link on /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Help_desk/Are_you_in_the_right_place
thanks WillemienH ( talk) 14:11, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
No I don't want to include the complete text I guess around 4 pages in total of the around 250 of book 1,(it is fat pocketbook size ) my idea is to make it an article that links to many other pages and vv. Is the particular translation you want to copy old enough to be PD? that is exactly what I also want to know :) WillemienH ( talk) 16:58, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
I added the link below to the article Sönke Neitzel:
Another editor commented that it may be problematic since it comes from YouTube.
However, I interpret Perennial websites: YT as okay to use YouTube as long as the video comes from the official channel:
AgendaStevePaikin looks official to me. It seems to me that if a program puts a video on their official YT channel, they want us to consume it.
Along the same lines, if a video comes from an official YT channel of a reputable organisation, such as U.S. Army Heritage and Education Center, and delivered by an WP:RS, reputable historian, would it be okay use as sources, in addition to external links?
K.e.coffman ( talk) 01:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
Dear User:MER-C and User:Justlettersandnumbers. This page is on overflow and appears at Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded (see the corresponding talk page). As a result, some parts of this page are not correctly displayed. Perhaps, you should consider splitting this page. Best regards. Pldx1 ( talk) 17:04, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
I have attempted to answer a copyright complaint at Talk:William Churchill (ethnologist). If any of the project's experts would chip in, I'd appreciate it. -- John of Reading ( talk) 08:17, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi. I am unsure if this is the correct place to put this but I am here to basically inform any mods/admins that there is a copyright dispute over the "Have I Been Pwned?" brand and name. This is being brought to attention due to an official Copyright application made via the UK GOV web site for sole rights to the "Have I Been Pwned?" brand and name which now puts the actual entity in full dispute. We are the guys responsible for the .org incarnation of ever so popular "Have I Been Pwned?" service run by Troy Hunt and we are making full claim to having come up with the idea as well much further back than 2013 which is when the main .com incarnation was introduced.
If this is not the correct place to make contact with a mod or administrator in regards to the official Wikipedia "Have I Been Pwned?" page, please could someone point us in the right direction or could an admin get in touch with us please via Talk. We are not privy to how Wikipedia works fully. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hibporg ( talk • contribs) 20:42, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
I was copy-editing Weald, and I had a question, so I asked Checkingfax, and s/he answered my question but also checked with Earwig's Copyvio detector, and found a high degree of similarity between the WP article and the published article. See User talk:Corinne#Weald and Earwig's copyright violation detector. According to Checkingfax, the source is [26]. – Corinne ( talk) 14:33, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
I just happened to come across this article and saw a notice regarding a copyright problem in the section Pará#Indigenous population that has been there for a while. Just thought I'd point it out. – Corinne ( talk) 02:55, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
{{
copyvio-revdel}}
requested. —
JJMC89 (
T·
C)
04:38, 1 April 2016 (UTC)Please see Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Works_that_are_PD_in_US_but_not_in_country_of_origin and comment. Want to make sure I'm in the clear before I add text. Thanks! Calliopejen1 ( talk) 23:23, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Please see Seolhyun Edit Summary. I accidentally made this mistake, and I believe it violates copyright until it is fixed. 78.148.65.71 ( talk) 15:43, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
I've been clashing this week with an editor who appears to be working for a digital media PR firm (evidence at [27]). Beyond any of the issues with POV-pushing and COI, though, one thing that bothers me clicking randomly through her edit history is that a lot of it seems to be plagiarized. I'm reading the policy correctly that this isn't allowed, right?
Edits for comparison:
I saw these in just a few minutes of searching, so unless this is some crazy fluke, I’d be surprised if the problem doesn’t run deeper than these few examples.
Would someone more experienced be willing to take a look at this? I don't feel confident enough in my understanding of Wikipedia policy to try to police it alone. I've tried raising this issue at other noticeboards and have gotten a lot of "not my department" sort of responses, and the editor herself refuses to respond to my concerns. Any advice would be welcome. Thanks, Ellen -- EllenMcGill ( talk) 15:59, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Sure, Justlettersandnumbers, if it’ll help.
LesbianAdvocate: in 1978, Walker's group pushed a bill through Congress that greatly cut capital gains taxes. The Council claimed this would boost financial markets. During this time the Council's board included Democratic "superlawyers" such as Clark Clifford and Edward Bennet Williams and supply-side advocate Arthur Laffer. Robert Keith Gray, a powerful Republican lobbyist, served as president. The Council lobbied hard and released numerous economic studies showing the benefits of their bill. In his book Revolt of the Haves, Robert Kuttner wrote: "Many of these studies later were shown to be based on unverifiable assumptions about how the market was likely to respond to a cut in the capital gains rates; yet they were presented as scientific fact, and by the time the liberal economists reassembled their forces and challenged the methodology in the various tax journals, the political battle was over and Charlie Walker's capital formation council had moved on to other issues." Although the 1978 capital gains tax cut bill passed, the predicted spurt in investment never materialized. Walker argued that other economic factors were in play and in November 1979 he told the Council's annual meeting that the tax cut had saved the economy from yet worse troubles.
Source (Blumenthal): “In 1978, Walker’s group won a swift and decisive campaign in Congress. The council developed a bill that would greatly reduce capital gains taxes. This, Walker claimed, would make the financial markets flush. His group by now had bipartisan support within the Washington establishment. On its board, seated alongside supply-side wizard Arthur Laffer, were venerable Democratic superlawyers Clark Clifford and Edward Bennett Williams; the council’s president was Robert Keith Gray, a high-powered lobbyist with close ties to prominent Republicans. The council lobbied hard … and released studies showing the beneficent effects the bill would have. Robert Kuttner, the economics correspondent for the New Republic, wrote in his book Revolt of the Haves: "Many of these studies later were shown to be based on unverifiable assumptions about how the market was likely to respond to a cut in the capital gains rates; yet they were presented as scientific fact, and by the time the liberal economists reassembled their forces and challenged the methodology in the various tax journals, the political battle was over and Charlie Walker's capital formation council had moved on to other issues."
Although the 1978 capital gains tax cut bill passed Congress overwhelmingly, there was no spurt in investment … Walker, however, was undaunted. In November 1979, he told the annual meeting of the council that the tax cut had saved the economy from deeper troubles.”
As you can see, she changed some of the language in a superficial way (though some exact phrases still slip through like “The Council lobbied hard”, “spurt of investment”, etc.), but no one could mistake this passage for anything but Blumenthal’s work. I assume this is what is meant by close paraphrasing? If a student had turned this in to me, I’d certainly be marking it “See Me After Class.”
For a fifth example, here’s a duplication detector check on another source from her attacks on Dish Network. [33]
I really appreciate your looking into this, and sorry I can’t be more help cleaning this up. I’m a little burnt out by having to battle with this company for two weeks (it is essentially now confirmed a digital PR firm was behind this, and they seem to be controlling multiple accounts) and am hoping to move on to calmer waters. Thanks, Ellen EllenMcGill ( talk) 12:45, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I just added a copyright template to Non-paternity event and wasn't sure if I need to explain it here. An IP editor re-added a data table that I had removed from Misattributed paternity (links to talkpage) before I merged it with Non-paternity event. (See misattributed paternity revision history). The IP editors clearly took the table from the old page, so presumably should have seen my edit summary where I said it was a copyright violation and gave the specific citation from the article. I just reverted the re-addition explaining it was a copyright violation and the IP editor started a conversation on Talk:Non-paternity event (after undoing my revert, but at least a discussion was initiated), so there are more information about the details about the violation on the talkpage. I added the copyright violation template and I'm posting here because I didn't remove the content again yet. It's the data table in the Rates of non-paternity in single births section. I wasn't sure what else to do. The content is a problem for a plethora of reasons, COPYVIO, OR, UNDUE, etc. etc. Thank you! PermStrump (talk) 15:33, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
According to the copyright notice of EUR-Lex, "except where otherwise stated, reuse of the EUR-Lex data for commercial or non-commercial purposes is authorised provided the source is acknowledged ('© European Union, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/, 1998-2016')." Is this consistent with Wikipedia's licensing requirements? Does it mean we can copy legal texts from EUR-Lex into Wikipedia articles? If so, do we have a template for articles that incorporate texts copied from EUR-Lex? — Kpalion (talk) 08:38, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
The article R2-45 links directly to two external web sources (tonyortega.org and wikilinks) that (according to the text in those same sources) carry a unauthorized 3-minute excerpt from a lecture by L. Ron Hubbard, copyrighted by the Church of Scientology. My understanding is that this violates Wikipedia:Verifiability#Copyright_and_plagiarism (rule is duplicated at WP:ELNEVER). The local editors accept that copyright is claimed on the material, [34] but they revert my edit when I remove the link and argue, under various theories, that the Church of Scientology cannot enforce copyright on the material. [35] [36] They also argue that linking is OK if it is for a different purpose.[ibid:"for the purposes of commentary"] Given the volume of the controversy, I reasonably expect that adding a WP:CV template to the page would be reverted and accomplish nothing. I have already been "warned" by an opposing editor that my insistence on following WP:POLICY on this and other issues is "continued tendentious editing". [37] Grammar'sLittleHelper ( talk) 06:53, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
Can I ask for an opinion on Economists' Statement on Climate Change#Text of statement? It quotes pretty much the entirety of the source page, but it's not the kind of thing that can easily be paraphrased. Cordless Larry ( talk) 08:22, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
Adelante Fraternity#History from http://www.adelante.org/about.php ? Naraht ( talk) 17:54, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
A discussion regarding old files with GFDL assumed licenses is taking place at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)#Old_licenses. Please see that discussion if you are interested. — xaosflux Talk 00:29, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Floquenbeam spotted what appeared to be a copyvio in our Hedy Epstein article and removed the relevant text. However, I think this is a case of someone copying the Wikipedia article. I haven't restored it, as I would like someone experienced in dealing with copyright issues to take a look first - all the details are at Talk:Hedy Epstein#Copyvio in "biography" section.
As this has been nominated to appear on WP:ITN, it would be excellent if someone could take a look before it becomes stale. Thank you. Thryduulf ( talk) 22:20, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Could someone please take appropriate steps. I believe this page was copied from the department's own website at [38] and should probably be deleted. Thanks. Taknaran ( talk) 14:55, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello copyright problem solvers. You probably stay busy enough with the reports on this noticeboard. However if you ever want to get more involved in keeping Wikipedia content free of copyright violations, checkout the new CopyPatrol tool. This tool is a web version of User:EranBot/Copyright that shows potential copyright violations as they are being added. Login using OAuth (you don't need to enter your password) to get started. You can click "compare" to compare the diff against the copyright source. Once you've confirmed it's a violation, please fix it and mark the entry as "Page fixed", or "No action needed" if it is not a violation.
Look forward to new features like filtering by WikiProject. This tool is still beta-ish, so please report any problems you encounter (or suggestions) here. Thanks! MusikAnimal (WMF) ( talk) 18:23, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Back in 2010 I add content removed in this edit which was "covers a lot of territory and preys on Montreal" from a source that said "preys on Montreal and covers a lot of territory", so pretty much a copyvio. I was new and guess I thought it was okay. Better you hear it from me. I am terribly sorry. I will check my other edits from around then to be sure that is the only one. Again, I'm sorry. Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 10:16, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
I've been pouring through my edits and have found another case. I've reworded. I am looking for more in other articles, but it is a bit difficult because this was around five years ago and there are plenty of reverse copyvios. Again, I am so sorry. I think I was simply trying to rearrange text in a notepad to avoid copyvios rather than doing a rewrite. I have no excuse, just that explanation. I promise to find any others and fix them. Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 23:27, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
It looks like this article as it stands now is at least a partial lift from this section of a paper from 2010. The "sources" tacked on failed RS. The paper is dated 2010, and I don't know how to (and don't know if there's a functionality to) step back through hundreds of edits in the article history to find when particular text was added. "There's too many edits to go through to find the problem" isn't a valid CSD copyvio reason, so I need a bit of help figuring this out. MSJapan ( talk) 19:22, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
I've removed a request for revdel from the electronic harassment article, as it raises copyright issues which I think should be examined here before choosing how to act on it. The template is
{{copyvio-revdel |url = http://www.google.ch/patents/US5123899 |start = 719308647}}
My concern is this: while uncredited copying of patent material is definitely plagiarism, and thus not allowed in articles, I'm not sure this necessarily counts as copyright infringement. See http://www.uspto.gov/terms-use-uspto-websites , which says, among other things: "Patents are published as part of the terms of granting the patent to the inventor. Subject to limited exceptions reflected in 37 CFR 1.71(d) & (e) and 1.84(s), the text and drawings of a patent are typically not subject to copyright restrictions." I'm not an expert or even particularly knowledgeable about any of this, so I have no idea whether or not this is relevant to this specific case, but I think this situation is worth taking here so more knowledgeable people can comment, or possibly even to the WMF itself for an opinion, as they have their own in-house lawyers for just this purpose.
(Pinging @ Jytdog: for courtesy.) -- The Anome ( talk) 14:20, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
Please review the corrections. Hopefully they will fix the copyright violation problem.
I was doing research for new article when I came across this message on this other talk page (diff: [39]) "The section on impusle response seems to have been lifted from [40]-- AwesomeWells ( talk) 11:55, 24 January 2012 (UTC)". I checked the section - and it does appear to have been copy and pasted from the aforementioned url before January 2012. In other words, it is still there. I looked at another section - and it may be that other sections of this article have also been copy pasted from other copyrighted sites. However, I have no desire to blank the whole page for one section that is "for sure", while the other sections are "maybe". Hopefully someone will look into this matter. Thanks. --- Steve Quinn ( talk) 03:34, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
Hi,
As a native French speaker, I'm not very aware of the procedure and a little bit lost in WP:DCV. Please, excuse me for that and let me explain here what I found out.
The text of this contribution seems to be copy of the official plot summary. On the official website or this trailer posted on Vimeo, the same capitalization can be found and the trailer is dated may 2015, prior to the contribution.
Best regards, -- Lacrymocéphale 21:35, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello!
I've never been here before and I don't know anything about either copyright law or wikipedia's copyright policy, but I did come across this page Driver License Compact which has an antique copyright warning that doesn't seem to be logged in your listing anymore. Or at least I couldn't find it. Not sure if it's really a copyvio or just a misplaced tag or what. Hopefully someone can take a look!! AgnosticAphid talk 22:11, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
A few months ago I uploaded a 1939 UK government document onto commons, which is currently shown in the infobox at White Paper of 1939. It is certainly not in copyright, since UK Crown Copyright for such materials expires 50 years after publication. However, this copy of the document comes from ProQuest, who claim to have copyright (see small text sentence watermarked at the bottom of the document). Their claim has no basis as they have not created it as an original work themselves.
I am bringing this here to check that others agree with my analysis.
Oncenawhile ( talk) 11:09, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm finding that since July 16, all the daily copyright problem subpages to this page are showing a date that's one day earlier than the date of the subpage. For example, all the dates on the July 17 page were July 16, until I changed them manually to July 17, and also fixed the pages for July 16, 19, and 21, but not for later pages. I also discovered that several of these pages (for July 16, 17, and 19) were missing from the day-by-day listing on this project page. Was their omission caused by the same bug? I'm adding them now. Largoplazo ( talk) 19:50, 29 July 2016 (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 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | → | Archive 23 |
As mentioned here [1]. Likely all their edits need going through. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 02:05, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Having edit-conflicted, I'm going to paste what I had originally written so I don't lose it. :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:58, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Source | Article |
---|---|
Since the time of the Second Vatican Council, the trend has been for Catholics to receive Confirmation later and later. Forty years ago, most Catholics were confirmed in the fifth or sixth grade. Thirty years ago, most were confirmed in seventh or eighth grade. In the last twenty years, Confirmation has moved to ninth and tenth grade. | Since the time of the Second Vatican Council, the trend has been for Catholics to receive Confirmation later and later. Forty years ago, most Catholics were confirmed in the fifth or sixth grade. Thirty years ago, most were confirmed in seventh or eighth grade. In the last twenty years, Confirmation has moved to ninth and tenth grade. |
Source | Article |
Originally, the Second District was an immensely valuable line, serving manufacturing and agricultural facilities through the San Gabriel Valley. However, longer trains always had difficulty climbing and descending the steep 2.2% grade at Arroyo Seco, between Pasadena and Los Angeles. Helper locomotives were often needed, making for inefficient operation. The still-used Third District opened in 1888, just a year after the Second District, and quickly took most long-distance freight traffic along its rails. The Second District and the Pasadena Depot became famous by the numerous transcontinental passenger trains that served it. At one point, up to 26 passenger trains went through Pasadena daily. To avoid the press in Los Angeles, many actors and other celebrities opted to make Pasadena their home train station, bringing to it an atmosphere and legacy of glitz and glamour. | Originally, the Second District was an invaluable line; it served manufacturing and agricultural businesses throughout the entire San Gabriel Valley. Unfortunately, the longer trains had great difficulty climbing the precipitous 2.2% grade at Arroyo Seco, between Pasadena and Los Angeles. Additional locomotives were often necessary, causing a more costly and less efficient operation. The still-used Third District opened in 1888, just a year after the Second District, and rapidly took over most of longer freight trains more efficaciously. The Second District and the Pasadena Depot became well known by the many transcontinental passenger trains that it served. Historically, up to 26 passenger trains went through Pasadena every day. In order to avoid the media in Los Angeles, many celebrities chose to use Pasadena as their main train station, bringing to it an ambience and legacy of the glamour of old Hollywood. |
source | article |
Julius Orton, a seventh generation descendant of Thomas.... serve as a guard for a pack train crossing the plains for Placerville, a booming California gold mining town. Finding no gold, Julius moved to Soquel, a lumber town near Santa Cruz, where he worked as a laborer and eventually developed his own herd of cattle. In 1859, accompanied by his wife and two small daughters, and driving a small herd of cattle, he walked more than 200 miles from the coast to a homestead along the Tule River southwest of Lindsay. Julius Orton became a part of Lindsay history in the 1880's when he took up a second 160 acre homestead on land adjacent to the property of Lewis and John Keeley, brothers who had homesteaded a few miles southwest of Lindsay in the mid 1870's. The "meat" of all this is that Julius Orton is credited with planting the first orange trees in the Lindsay district on his homestead, giving rise to the motto, "Central California's Citrus Center." | Julius Orton, a seventh generation descendant of Thomas, served as security for a pack train headed for Placerville, a booming California gold mining town, motivated by his futile search for gold. In 1859, with his wife and two small daughters, and driving a small herd of cattle, walked more than 200 miles from the coast near Sacramento, to a homestead along the Tule River, southwest of Lindsay. In the 1880s, Julius Orton homesteaded another (160 acre) piece of land bordering on the property of pioneers Lewis and John Keeley, brothers who had taken on a homestead just a few miles southwest of Lindsay in the mid 1870's |
source | article |
Media outlets define the idea of beauty. The size zero woman in a barely-there outfit with long, flowing hair appears on every ad page of every magazine. Close your eyes and you can picture her because her image has been burned into your brain. | Media outlets define the idea of beauty. The size zero woman in a barely-there outfit with long, flowing hair appears on every ad page of every magazine. Close your eyes and you can picture her because her image has been burned into your brain. |
source | article |
Rosemead spokeswoman Aileen Flores said city officials last month dedicated a future park site in Imperial's honor. Jay Imperial Park will eventually be situated in the Southern California Edison right of way near Garvalia Avenue and San Gabriel Boulevard. Construction on the park could began in as soon as six months. | Rosemead spokeswoman Aileen Flores said that in June 2011, city officials dedicated a future park site to honor six-time Mayor, the late Jay Imperial. Jay Imperial Park will be situated in the Southern California Edison right of way near Garvalia Avenue and San Gabriel Boulevard. Construction on the park will begin in 2012 |
There are currently requests for comment open on meta to create two new global groups. The first is a group for members of the OTRS permissions queue, which would grant them autopatrolled rights on all wikis except those who opt-out. That proposal can be found at m:Requests for comment/Creation of a global OTRS-permissions user group. The second is a group for Wikimedia Commons admins and OTRS agents to view deleted file pages through the 'viewdeletedfile' right on all wikis except those who opt-out. The second proposal can be found at m:Requests for comment/Global file deletion review.
We would like to hear what you think on both proposals. Both are in English; if you wanted to translate them into your native language that would also be appreciated.
It is possible for individual projects to opt-out, so that users in those groups do not have any additional rights on those projects. To do this please start a local discussion, and if there is consensus you can request to opt-out of either or both at m:Stewards' noticeboard.
Thanks and regards, Ajraddatz ( talk) 18:05, 26 October 2014 (UTC)Hi, the article Services marketing was tagged for copy-editing; I came across it whilst vetting articles for a GOCE drive event. I noticed the text has a high standard of written English and a dearth of references, so i searched using Google. The website http://www.managementstudyguide.com appears to be the source of the bulk of the article, particularly the pages http://www.managementstudyguide.com/services-marketing.htm and http://www.managementstudyguide.com/seven-p-of-services-marketing.htm, amongst others. The website claims copyright of the material but I'm uncertain whether it originated there, so i've tagged the article with {{ copypaste}} and reported my concerns here, per WP:COPYVIO. Thanks for your time. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 ( talk) 06:12, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
I have this strange issue and although I have some experience in writing and publishing I am new in wikipedia and I am very pondering for this issue which is happening in our local wikipedia in Greece. I hope my English are enough to clearly describe to you the right picture of the issue, otherwise feel free to ask me and I will try to clarify. It is important to know that all active admins in Greek wikipedia are more or less about 10 people, which they know each other most of them. I am trying to make some improvements and corrections in Greek topic for EEZ - Exclusive Economic Zone using strictly the United Nation web page and United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea which is there too, because many sources of the topic are newspaper link which are not much accurate. I am trying to make a strict translation without adding wording which may lead in change important meaning of the Convention. This is something that most of scientist do here concerning this Convention and if the y want later they are adding their private opinion. Some of them are writing book as in our case this book here: https://www.academia.edu/3645806/%CE%97_%CF%80%CE%B5%CF%81%CE%B9%CE%B2%CE%B1%CE%BB%CE%BB%CE%BF%CE%BD%CF%84%CE%B9%CE%BA%CE%AE_%CE%B4%CE%B9%CE%AC%CF%83%CF%84%CE%B1%CF%83%CE%B7_%CF%84%CF%89%CE%BD_%CF%83%CF%85%CE%BC%CE%B2%CE%AC%CF%83%CE%B5%CF%89%CE%BD_%CE%B5%CE%BE%CE%B5%CF%81%CE%B5%CF%8D%CE%BD%CE%B7%CF%83%CE%B7%CF%82_%CF%84%CF%89%CE%BD_%CF%80%CF%8C%CF%81%CF%89%CE%BD_%CF%84%CE%BF%CF%85_%CE%B4%CE%B9%CE%B5%CE%B8%CE%BD%CE%BF%CF%8D%CF%82_%CE%B2%CF%85%CE%B8%CE%BF%CF%8D
Although I use the original source from UN and I did refer the source I used in every paragraph (altough it is the same source) the admins keep say that the later book (the one with the url above) is protected with copyright and I cannot use the specific text, although that the translation is not exactly the same but in tree sentences you can understand how similar the translation of the same paragraph can be!
The original text that is used translated is here: ".... In 1945, President Harry S Truman, responding in part to pressure from domestic oil interests, unilaterally extended United States jurisdiction over all natural resources on that nation's continental shelf - oil, gas, minerals, etc. This was the first major challenge to the freedom-of-the-seas doctrine. Other nations soon followed suit...." ( http://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_historical_perspective.htm#Historical%20Perspective)
This is the original text from Convention which is used and it is free to use but admin keeps saying that is not allowed to use since that it is used in a later Greek book! How someone can take a free text and make it copyright and nobody else can use it?
So the admin keeps telling that this is copyright violation and delete all data and maps I enter. How this can be resolved? Any assistance will be highly appreciated.
The link of the topic is here: https://el.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%91%CF%80%CE%BF%CE%BA%CE%BB%CE%B5%CE%B9%CF%83%CF%84%CE%B9%CE%BA%CE%AE_%CE%9F%CE%B9%CE%BA%CE%BF%CE%BD%CE%BF%CE%BC%CE%B9%CE%BA%CE%AE_%CE%96%CF%8E%CE%BD%CE%B7
Compugraphs ( talk) 18:39, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your time. About the permission for the original I have contacted UN and I have been told to use it just add a disclaimer stating that “This is not an official UN translation." So there is no problem to use, the problem is that because somebody else translated and uploaded as their paper at academia.edu the wikipedia admin claims that this paragraphs belongs to them so although my translation is not exactly the same with the paper uploaded in academia.edu the admin keeps saying that it similar and cannot be used, in other words to explain it straitfully the paper uses context from US without stating that (so they do copyright violation) and when somebody else tranlsalte the same paragraph from UN the admin (who in my opinion he is not so much stupid as he wants to look) delete all article because does not accept that the master documents is UN (which anyway is older date) and we do have the permisiion fron them to use it... I hope I gave you the picture of what is going on.. Regarding the authorisation, I do not thing that needs special permission for the Greece wikipedia as long as somebody can understand the language, my self with the same login I can edit any topic in any language.... Compugraphs ( talk) 14:36, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Dear copyright experts: I came across an article, Dhianpur, to which a large copied section had been added. I removed it, but is there a need to redact the revisions which contain the copied text? I read the information on the project page here, but it has nested "unless" statements which aren't clear to me. Are there other conditions besides request by the copyright holder under which copyvio revisions should be hidden, or is my task done by reverting to a non-offending version? — Anne Delong ( talk) 12:26, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Even if direct infringement is found, however, it is unlikely that the editor and administrator flagging and removing copyright issues in the current article, but not necessarily in previous versions of the article, will be held liable for contributory infringement. Under contributory infringement, one who, (1) with knowledge, (2) induces, causes, or materially contributes to (3) copyright infringement, (4) but does not commit or participate in the infringing act may be held liable contributorily (5) if he or she had knowledge, or reason to know, of the infringement. The editor and administrator flagging and removing a copyright issue in a Wikipedia article are not likely to be held responsible for contributory infringement because they are likely not engaged in inducing, causing, or materially contributing to the infringement during the general course of removing or flagging content. Rather, in this capacity, the editor and administrator are working towards taking down instances of possible infringement they see and therefore are not actually contributing to the infringing activity.
Dear copyright experts: I came across an old AfC draft that had been edited by several people and then copy-pasted into mainspace, not by its originator. I decided to history-merge the two pages, which I did ( Artis (non-profit company); HOWEVER, I was careless enough not to notice that there were five edits relating to an old copyvio version which I should have left behind when I did the merge. Now the copyvio is in the history of the mainspace article (sigh). I thought I could just use WP:REVDEL to make these invisible. Is that okay? Or, since they were intended to be deleted, should I delete the page and restore all but those five? Or, should I delete the page, move the five offending edits back where I got them, delete them there, and restore the mainspace page without them? (messy) I promise to pay more attention in the future. — Anne Delong ( talk) 16:43, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
I am looking at expanding the copy and paste detection bot globally. Am looking at hiring staff to help. They will not only collect data on the size of the issue for publication but also edit Wikipedia. Are people here okay with that? Please join the discussion here. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 07:51, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Not sure this is the right place, but I'd appreciate the advice of someone knowledgeable about CC and related copyright issues in this discussion. Many thanks! -- Randykitty ( talk) 12:46, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure of how to deal with this: there is a new article with an unusual name, A47: Airflow Over Airplane Wing; its creator has made no other edits on WP and an article with the same name was deleted from Wikibooks earlier this month due to copyright violations (see here). YSSYguy ( talk) 01:31, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
- by admin - copyvio deleted from history.
My concern is with Lawrence Weiskrantz.... is it acceptable to copy and paste so much material that basically now makes up the bulk of the article? I think not but the edit was re-established by a third party because they are now using quotes and a link to the copyrighted page. I am concerned about this... pls See Lawrence Weiskrantz - Violation Suspected 80.2% for the text involved ( WP:Fairuse and WP:PD). -- Moxy ( talk) 03:44, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
It looks as if someone copy-and-pasted most of the "history" section of this, in 2005. See Talk:Saint-Antonin-Noble-Val. Pam D 23:38, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
User:Dcoetzee, the author of the contribution surveyor and duplication detector (I consider this superseded by [6]) tools, has been globally permabanned by the WMF. In the medium term, we should find a new maintainer for them. I have my own contribution surveyor, but it will not be a replacement (I cannot run it with my current hosting setup on Google App Engine, for a start). MER-C 03:23, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
I pinged Dcoetzee a few months back when the DD tool looked to be behaving oddly. He said then that he hadn't touched it in quite a long time, so as long as the tool is allowed to run, it should hopefully do so without much intervention. He did also say that it can essentially run anywhere, even on a home PC/Server properly equipped, so there's options there too. Crow Caw 19:29, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
I think it would be useful if the page contained a section with a brief description of the tools available and either links to the tools themselves or a link to Wikipedia:Wikimedia Labs/Toolserver replacements so that editors who become interested in copyright problems can be informed that such tool exist, and also to act as a news feature for editors who suddenly find that a tool they rely on no longer works. If such a section exists on another page then a prominent mention on the page of such a section on another page would help spread the information. Thoughts?-- PBS ( talk) 13:18, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
On January 6th, editor 93.146.99.156 added the entire plot text as distributed by The Weinstein Company to The Hateful Eight#Plot. The editor added some (incorrect) internal links, removed the first four words, and moved one comma, but that's it. You can find this plot text, for example, here and here. After the editor did this, the Plot section has barely been changed. -- 82.136.210.153 ( talk) 16:48, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
We have expanded EranBot as a pilot to look at a wider range of topics (all of English Wikipedia).
We have the output tagged by WikiProject. The hope is to eventually make the list sortable with a drop down box to specific WikiProjects.
We are also looking at methods to make it easier to indicate which have been dealt with and will need to figure out some auto archiving of concerns once they are addressed.
Still a work in progress. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 17:09, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
My issue is copyvio links in iamages. If you see [7] realhistoryww.com/ is linked in a number of images. I've looked at this website and it has quite a few full copies of newspaper articles, articles from the BBC website, etc, so as I understand it we should have no links to it. Thanks Dougweller ( talk) 12:18, 8 January 2015 (UTC) This comment by Dougweller moved here from Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2015 January 8. Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 23:54, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
It seems that in December 2003, user Olivier created Tai Mo Shan "based on information provided by the Hong Kong Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) [of the Government of Hong Kong], under the provision that the re-dissemination or reproduction is for non-commercial use". (The article has been significantly expanded since then, but a lot of the original text remains.) Would this be a copyright violation (since Wikipedia doesn't allow non-commercial)? I'm not sure if it was a copy-paste, given that the department's current page bears little resemblance to it; but the attribution implies that some content was reproduced. (The earliest revision is reminiscent of an advertisement encouraging people to visit.) Jc86035 ( talk • contributions) 10:22, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
I have put the rewrite in place. Thank you, Olivier. Jc86035, fortunately all we need for attribution is a list of authors. We can hide the text without compromising that. In this case, however, I'm not sure we need to do that. We do not always remove copyright issues from the histories of articles. Given the proportion here, I don't know that it's necessary. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:09, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Are EPA documents, I.e this onein the public domain? If not there is a problem since 2006 at Onsite sewage facility. TMCk ( talk) 23:07, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
I've just taken a look at the 2015 Four Continents Figure Skating Championships page after editing some few hours ago and I noticed that the newly added prose in the recap section seemed familiar. A quick Google search confirms that the text has mostly been copied from the official ISU website, which I read earlier in the day. The text was added by 122.106.242.42 ( talk · contribs). When I checked their prior contributions, I noticed that they have added similar prose sections to the 2014 Four Continents Figure Skating Championships and 2013 Four Continents Figure Skating Championships. I haven't check them against the ISU website yet, but I fear they too are copyright violations. At the very least, the prose and quotes are not attributed to any sources. I was just wondering if removing the prose and placing {{ Cclean}} on the talk page was the best course of action? I was planning on warning the IP with {{ uw-copyright}} too. Any advice would be appreciated. - JuneGloom07 Talk 01:29, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
There's discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 February 4#Category:Creative Communism License about renaming some categories for Wikipedians. The discussion would benefit from advice from someone knowledgeable about copyright. Or, if there's a better place to find an editor with that expertise please let me know. DexDor ( talk) 07:28, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Hopefully this is the correct place to put this. I was looking at the article Tudor Hall School, Banbury and the style of it felt too promotional. I got suspicious, so took at look at the school's website and found that the pastoral, sports, and extra curricular sections have been copy-and-pasted from there into the article. Other bits of the article may have been pasted as well, I didn't check thoroughly. -- 82.4.111.110 ( talk) 18:02, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Hey all, Just a note that I switched Duplication Detector and Contribution Surveyor to an upgraded version of the operating system (Ubuntu) and code engine (PHP) it runs on. This should have no effect on any use of the tool, however if you DO notice issues please let me know so that I can revert until I have time to troubleshoot. Jalexander-- WMF 23:39, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
The one sentence body of this stub article, Batter board, is taken word for word from the referenced link, a building construction glossary: http://www.oldhouseweb.com/how-to-advice/backhand-to-butt-joint.shtml. I tagged the page with a copy-paste template and notified the originating editor, the one who entered it. This seems not to be the first time the editor has done this. This is the first time I've dealt with a copyright violation. If I have botched the operation, please let me know. Thank you, Wordreader ( talk) 18:19, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
This article states "Based on original text by Peter Kemp, The Johann Strauss Society of Great Britain. Used with permission". There is no citation of where the original text comes from, or any evidence of permission having been sought or given. The article has no in-line citations, and doesn't seem to have been significantly edited since 2004. It seems to me therefore to contravene WP:COPYVIO - am I right? Thanks, -- Smerus ( talk) 11:22, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
At the bottom of Lightweight Telephony Protocol is a manually-entered copyright notice ( permalink). I'm not familiar with the finer points of Wikipedia's copyright policies, but this looked a little strange to me. — danhash ( talk) 00:30, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
http://www.bollywoodhungama.com/ad_overlay.php Does any contributor with copyright knowledge of this site? I have had a cursory look around it but found no copyright status. I have recently removed a couple of what were in my opinion clear copyright violations from this page Kashish Singh and one contributor is seemingly insistent in posted one. They are all on wiki, commons and I have no edits there. This is the current inserted photo. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kashish-Singh-at-the-launch-of-Blenders-Pride-Tour-2013.jpg Govindaharihari ( talk) 15:15, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
The new and improved copy and detection bot that we at WP:MED have been using for nearly a year is nearly ready to be expanded to other topic areas.
It can be found here [10]. If you install the common.js code it will give you buttons to click to indicate follow up of the concerns.
Additionally one can sort the edits in question by WikiProject. We are working to set up auto-archiving such that once concerns are dealt with they will be removed from the main list.
We also want to have automatic compilation of data such as the frequency of true positives and false positives generated by the bot. A blacklist of sites that are know mirrors of Wikipedia is here [11]. As this list is improved / expanded the accuracy of the bot will improve. Many thanks to User:ערן for his amazing work.
Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 09:00, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
I have raised a new issue at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2015 April 11 but am not sure that it is going to get serviced. Am I right in thinking that entries here are automated from page tagging? The issue concerns the reference desk and I don't really want to tag that page. Spinning Spark 16:55, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
The link to the "author" is here. This person has several e-books available on Google which are nothing but HTML lifts of WP articles. There is an attribution in the books that they are GNU Free Licensed and taken from Wikipedia, but I think I take issue with the claiming of authorship of all these different books by this one person, which is definitely not true. Additionally, because of the direct lifting, all the pictures including material we have as fair use, are being reproduced for profit (and thus used without permission. The Art of Movies in particular may be reproducing images from the various articles on Bishojo, etc, which may be non-free. These are all fairly sizable 1000+ page items, so I can't really sift them myself. MSJapan ( talk) 06:28, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
As Wgolf mentioned, OpenHistory is used as a source for 60 articles. The copyright of OpenHistory states
"You may copy and distribute the Document in any medium, either commercially or noncommercially, provided that this License, the copyright notices, and the license notice saying this License applies to the Document are reproduced in all copies, and that you add no other conditions whatsoever to those of this License"
I don't think we use a "GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.1 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation", and I'm not sure if Wikipedia's terms count as added conditions, but if it is, should this not be removed from the articles it's used in? (Eg OpenHistory page [13]) Thanks, 1Potato2Potato3Potato4 ( talk) 07:22, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
At The Age of Adaline I've just removed the third copyvio plot summary in about as many days. There's already a {{ Copyvio plot}} template on the talk page which doesn't seem to be a sufficient deterrent. I looked around and found {{ Copyright editnotice}}, but that doesn't seem to be correctly formatted as an edit notice (it appears as a permanent banner on the page). Would this be a useful addition to our arsenal, and if so could some kind admin or template editor fix it? Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 09:11, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Could I possibly get some assistance from someone with more copyright knowledge than me? We have a page that is a cut&paste from another source. But it has been removed from the other source, and all that is left is a Google cache. But that's enough to show that it was first published at the other site, which does have copyright notices on the site. OTOH, the submitter is quite possibly the same person/organization that submitted to the other site in the first place. And I also have concerns that they actually have control over the other site, making it difficult for them to do either of the normal methods of proving that they have the authority to submit the material. The author says that the material is in the public domain, but I saw no notice of such at the original location of publication. Communication has taken place at the page linked above, on the talk page of the author, and via private email, though I generally try to avoid conducting project business off-wiki. I need someone more experienced to step in and evaluate the situation. Am I possibly off-base calling it a copyright situation? If not, how can we help the author to prove that they have the ability to submit the text as public domain? And none of that gets to the fact that the text in question is IMHO an unencyclopedic wall of text. Sigh. - TexasAndroid ( talk) 18:13, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia user Bikeroo has made posts on early association football players, using information copied from the book 'First Elevens: the birth of international football' by Andy Mitchell. As author of this book I believe this is in breach of copyright, even with reference tags - the detailed information is not available elsewhere, and the reproduction of this information goes far beyond 'fair usage'.
Examples include these pages: Alexander Nash, Giulio Cowley Smith. There are others.
This kind of behaviour is detrimental to researchers like myself, whose work is being copied and distributed for free.
Kvaratschelia 13:43, 30 March 2015
{{subst:copyvio|url=''First Elevens: the birth of international football'' by Andy Mitchell}}
at the beginning of the copied material and </div>
at the end. You'll then need to follow the instructions on the resulting template.Thanks for your response but I have to disagree with your definition of copyright and fair usage. You are effectively saying it is OK to lift detailed information from a book, so long as you change the order of the words. I stand by my earlier comments, and add that after challenging Wikipedia user Bikeroo about this behaviour, he/she decided to retire from Wikipedia - an admission of guilt if ever there was one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kvaratschelia ( talk • contribs) 18:38, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Do links to sources need to be ones that do not infringe copyrights/cause the user to infringe copyrights? For example, the link provided for "The Salmon of Doubt…" by Margulies on fMRI would appear to infringe copyright since the source is normally only available through authorized channels; should the link be removed? I have yet to see where this is directly addressed by existing policies, although I would remove it as a courtesy to Wikipedia (to prevent DMCA notices) and users (to prevent unintentional copyright infringement, at least in the US). In general, do sources need to be legal/legally accessible/not pose a threat to the user? -- ChrstphrChvz ( talk • contribs) 03:18, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
This one has me confused, in part because even our own templates are vague. We've got a bunch of newly created articles sending CorenBot into a frenzy. They're articles on the various amendments and related material on India's constitution. They would seem to fall under
Template:PD-India as laws/acts-of-legislature, though that template also includes the caution: This file may not be in the public domain outside India. The creator and year of publication are essential information and must be provided.
The constitution itself dates to 1949, with numerous amendments up through 2009. So: is the text of these amendments, which is PD in India, considered PD here or a copyvio? Pinging
Hut 8.5 who's also investigated some of these on SCV.
Crow
Caw
22:26, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
This article needs urgent attention. Two editors, Folks at 137 ( talk · contribs) and Philipnelson99 ( talk · contribs) are re-inserting text copied from [15]. Nigel Ish ( talk) 17:06, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
This article has no references. Much of it reads like a press release and searching for the second paragraph of this section I found it verbatim in this WHO document. I have tagged the article, but do not know how to take care of copyvio's other than deleting them, so I am mentioning the article here. Thanks. μηδείς ( talk) 02:51, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
On the main WP:CP page. New dates will no longer appear at the bottom, and as old dated get moved to the "Older than 5 days" section, it will only get worse! Any help clearing the old days' CP and SCV's will be most appreciated. Pie on request even! Crow Caw 16:02, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
The History section of Downtown Las Vegas sure reads like a copyvio, and sure enough it's very similar to text from the book "Ultimate Handbook Guide to Las Vegas : (United States)." Problem is the material was added June 2014, and the book was published October 2014. Maybe there was an earlier edition? Would a travel book copy from WP without attribution? Kendall-K1 ( talk) 14:22, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
I came across an article which had copied content from another article (which I first mis-identified as an external copyvio, but seems to be the other way around: content forked from Wikipedia). For such cases, is it sufficient to note the revision from which it was taken in an edit summary of the pages the content, or do we have any templates to tag that on the receiving page's talkpage? 92.64.31.85 ( talk) 12:02, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Dear copyright experts: Some time ago, an editor made a draft copy of Nagla Murli at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Nagla murli and then added an infobox. I have moved the infobox to the mainspace article, as the only useful edition, leaving an edit summary crediting the editor who created it. Is it necessary to now redirect this draft to the mainspace article to preserve the attribution of the infobox? It's strictly data, with no composition of sentences or design work. Or can the draft just be deleted? — Anne Delong ( talk) 17:56, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
TL;DR : Can a Category violate copyright ?
There's plenty of advice on the copyright of text and of images, but none that I can find on categories.
I picked up St Mary's Church, Haddenham at new page patrol and, by way verifying its notability, added a ref :
Would a category, say Category:Jenkin's 1000 best churches, to include those churches violate his copyright? I'm guessing that creating a Wikipedia:Books probably would.
Similarly, for the Baedeker guides, especially in light of the Baedeker raids? Or Pevsner for Pevsner Architectural Guides?
I'm not 100% sure I want to create the category yet, but I am sure I don't want to unwittingly blunder into copyvio. Thanks. Bazj ( talk) 11:36, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
Dear copyright experts: In the case listed here: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Appsolutely everything/GetJar, it seems that there has been copying within Wikipedia, but I'm not sure that merging the histories is the right thing to do, because the text in question was previously deleted from the article as too promotional. Can someone who has dealt with this situation before please comment on the page? Thanks.— Anne Delong ( talk) 02:58, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Looks like User:Mahdisney is copy-pasting into multiple articles e.g. [16] but there are many more. 82.132.215.107 ( talk) 14:05, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Additional eyes are needed at the Flitfire article. User:Cubgirl4444 is reinserting text copied from [17], despite warning on the article talk page and on their talk page. Just to make things more difficult, the article in question is in the middle of an afd discussion, with the content in question also having been added to (and removed from) the Piper J-3 Cub article. I don't know whether some sort of revdel is needed. Nigel Ish ( talk) 17:58, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Response: first article... nomination for deletion within an hour or two of page creation. Didn't know about a sandbox. Was trying to create a historical article. Nigel Ish claimed he was no longer active user on his user page & then was deleting all my work. It was confusing. I think Newbie's do get a little slack here. Most people who are new don't want to break rules; they just don't understand things at first. No need for everyone to act like the Gestapo. A friendly word will go a lot farther than harsh barking.
P.S. It took me a couple of hours to figure out the "talk" thing. It's not very intuitive & may have appeared that I was ignoring messages, at first. Sending an email would've gotten an immediate response.
Cubgirl4444 ( talk) 01:05, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello. I've raised the question at the non-free content talk page regarding whether consensus exists to allow an exception to our prohibition against including the complete or extensive quotation of the lyrics of non-free songs in the case of national anthems. Guidance on this is currently somewhat contradictory. If you have an opinion on the matter, your feedback there would be welcome! -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:28, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
I deleted the above as a copyvio of a web page with a copyright notice, however as another editor has pointed out to me, the page suggests that it is a transliteration of The Catholic Encyclopedia from 1907. So what is the situation here - should we have an article that is a straight copy from another source (and, indeed, reads like someone's personal opinion)? Should I send it to AfD for further opinion? Black Kite (talk) 23:20, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
While checking out two SCV entries that were internal copies of this article, and since I'm just returning from a long absence, I would like to get a sense from others on what they think about the edits performed by an IP on March 22nd. Specifically the amount of fully wikified text and the interval between time stamps. I'm too out of practice to be a good judge. Thanks. MLauba ( Talk) 22:49, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Dear copyright experts: I tried to tag the page Draft:Global Management Accounting Principles as a copyright violation of http://www.academia.edu/11433654/TRUST_VALUE_RELEVANCE_INFLUENCE, using Twinkle, but was unable to do so because of "invalid token". Did I do something wrong? or is there something special about this page?— Anne Delong ( talk) 01:39, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Does anyone mind if I update {{ CPC}} to be more in line with other administrative board response templates (e.g. {{ AIV}}, {{ ANEW}}, {{ RFPP}} etc.)? Specifically, I'd like to remove the indentation, bullet, and signature, because the current formatting makes it difficult to respond to nested complaints. See history of Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2014 December 21 for an example). — Darkwind ( talk) 02:54, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
::{{RFPP|p|2 days}} ~~~~
or ::{{AIV|ani}} ~~~~
versus {{subst:CPC|c}}
. Admittedly not everyone who works this board is an admin, or even if they are, they may not regularly contribute at these other boards, so if the current template is what people are used to in their workflow, that's fine and I don't want to disrupt that. Rather than change the main template to suit my workflow, I'll probably just fork a copy at another name somewhere without the formatting. —
Darkwind (
talk)
18:25, 2 August 2015 (UTC)--~~~~
. For people like myself who have put an em-dash or other punctuation at the start of their signature specifically to avoid typing --~~~~
all the time, it ends up looking a bit ridiculous (--—
Darkwind (
talk) for example). —
Darkwind (
talk)
18:29, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
Please see User talk:XXzoonamiXX#Copying within Wikipedia. I was alerted to on inter-article copy because of the tell-tail failure to copy over a long citation in the references section to support short citations in the copied text. So far so usual. However, as can be seen in User talk:XXzoonamiXX#Copying within Wikipedia, I have added two other other examples of the same text being inserted into multiple articles, these may be (probably are) examples of text originally added to one article by XXzoonamiXX and then added into other articles. Could some other editors, who are more experienced than I am at this sort of thing, have a look and give further guidance to XXzoonamiXX if that is thought necessary. -- PBS ( talk) 18:05, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
I had added some material to the B'Tselem page from their "About us" website: "B'Tselem is funded by contributions from foundations in Europe and North America that support human rights activity worldwide, and by private individuals in Israel and abroad". I cannot see any copyright notice on the page, it seems weird to me that the "About us" page would be copyrighted, and also the text seems very short to me. But another user flagged it as a copyvio. What is the opinion about this? I have rewritten the text anyway, but I would like to know for the future. Kingsindian ♝ ♚ 10:38, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
I added several section {{ Copypaste}}s to Faith healing. Google Book searches show block of identical text in two sources ( this and this). Both look like they are self-published and are not found in worldcat. Both do not show a copyright page in Google Books preview. I don't know how to determine if those books are the sources copied into Wikipedia or if Wikipedia is the source without that copyright information to look through the article history to see what came first. What can I do? – BoBoMisiu ( talk) 18:24, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
The page Tactile imaging is a confusing tangle of possible copyright violations and conflict of interest, and it's a little beyond me. There is significant overlap with this article, complete with awkward language suggestive of a non-native English speaker. The article, along with several other publications with V. Egorov as an author that are cited in Tactile imaging, seems to be the basis for much of the article, so it is probably no coincidence that most of the article has been written by Egorov123. Note that the link above is to a draft in the US National Library of Medicine, much of which is public domain, but the final edited form is published in Current Medical Imaging Reviews. Similarly, many of the figures ( File:Figure2TI.png, File:Figure3TI.png File:Figure4TI.png, File:Figure5TI.png , are copies of figures from this article. In Wikipedia Commons the source is given as "own work", which they may well have been originally, but now I presume that the journal owns them. In addition, contributions to other articles by Egorov123 seem closely related to the research interests of V. Egorov. RockMagnetist( talk) 22:06, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Response from Vladimir Egorov: It seems to me that the expertise of RockMagnetist does not allow him/her to make judgments neither about the scientific description of the innovative technology nor about the published article language. I wrote the page Tactile Imaging based on my scientific knowledge and referenced publications. All used figures are my own. The page is open for improvements. Sometimes, I contribute into the wiki and other pages which have intersections with my scientific interests and I see that the page was written by a post-doc servant with an intellect of a kindergarten children. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:8B:C300:4A00:1C02:6AD7:F0A4:E50D ( talk) 18:06, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
How many entries from a dictionary can be quoted at one article (or its talk page) before this is a copyright issue? Does it matter if they're quote in full or in part? Does it matter if they're quoted in one or multiple citations? By different editors? In a single edit? In different threads/sections? — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 03:56, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
Dear copyright experts: This old draft User:Kvasconez/sandbox appear to be a copy of an article sponsored by a government department, rather than a policy document or other official publication. Is this copyright?— Anne Delong ( talk) 15:35, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
The long list of errors in the current version of the article Neuromuscular junction disease brought me to this diff by an IP from more than a year ago: [18]. I can see this as being a potential copyright problem on two fronts; first the large amount of text is not properly sourced, and I guess it has been copied from somewhere else within wikipedia without proper attribution. I do not know the proper forum for addressing such a concern, so I am posting it here. Regards, AtHomeIn神戸 ( talk) 06:07, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
I created this template because finding and removing the correct </div> template once the copyright violation is resolved may be tricky on pages that already had </div> on them when {{subst:copyvio|....}} was placed on the page.
The template expands to </div>. The only reason I made it is so that it "stands out" on a page and is therefore easy to spot and remove once the copyright issue is resolved. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs) 05:18, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Dear experts,
I was reading the page on Young-adult_fiction when I noticed a lot of unusual citations, such as "(Cart 43)." I did a little googling and found that most of the text was lifted directly from http://community.worldheritage.org/articles/Young_adult_literature, with some minor variation in text up until 15 March 2013 when it was edited to match the source text directly. Unless I'm getting it backwards, and the encyclopedic reference copied Wikipedia first, shouldn't this be fixed post-haste?
Best regards, 2602:306:B8ED:DE0:6D56:DFAA:A791:43F4 ( talk) 23:45, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Following the community indef and ban of Billy Hathorn I attempted to start a discussion of (1) what to do about his contributions (2) what to do about the CCI backlog and (3) whether the community wants to ask the Foundation to look into better and more robust ways of dealing with long-term abuse. The discussion got archived before it had really had time to get started, so I'm trying again here. Leaving aside 2 and 3 for now, I believe we need to try to reach a decision on what should be done about Hathorn's contribs. In that brief discussion, Nyttend made this proposal:
I know that it's a huge amount of text, but I'm still in favor of nuking all articles created by him and not significantly edited by others. The first step would be bot deletion of all articles never edited by other users, aside from bot edits and human edits that were marked as minor. This done, the bot could give a full list of articles that had fewer than X non-minor edits by humans (I'll suggest five), and admins could go through the list to check for non-minor edits, marking ones that had been checked and cleared. Once these were done, the bot would give us a list of all other articles created by him, and we'd repeat the delete-or-mark process. Splitting up the process would both make it easier to do (simply by making more-but-smaller chunks of work) and make it so that we got the more-likely-to-be-problematic articles first. The time-related problem at CCI is that you're supposed to check each article individually against the potential sources, if I remember rightly. If we're deleting everything that's not gotten significant contributions from other editors (by which I'm meaning major rewrites, not just significant content additions), we don't need to worry about checking contents: a few seconds would suffice to check virtually all articles, and the exceptions would involve checking just a few diffs. I'd suggest that the bot handle all deletions, including ones that had been checked and cleared for deletion. Two process points: (1) Bot uses an edit summary reading something like "Deleting page created by user with an extensive history of copyright infringement. Page may be recreated by any user", because we don't want to discourage people from creating new articles on the same topics. (2) Bot's userspace has a fully protected page on which admins can leave a list of links, and the bot deletes every article that's linked from this page. This would potentially save us a ton of time (you can check twenty pages and copy/paste their names much faster than you can check them and delete them) as well as ensuring a consistent edit summary. Since the deletions requiring human checking would be bot-performed on human instructions, we wouldn't need to worry about WP:CONTEXTBOT.
There were comments in support from MER-C and Blackmane, and a question from Rich Farmbrough. Are there objections to this, better solutions, or technical or other reasons why it can not now go ahead? I'd like to suggest that it be supplemented with a "Darius Dhlomo" warning tag for all articles that are not summarily deleted, to avoid the possibility of good-faith editors working on corrupt content that will later have to be removed. Pinging Moonriddengirl, Wizardman, Diannaa, Hut 8.5, Psychonaut and Crow for comment. Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 23:05, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
I was wondering if someone would mind taking a look at Samba district#Name origin. The entire section looks as if it's been copied and pasted (including citation markers) from somewhere. The entire section is unsourced, so simply removing it per WP:NOR is one possibility; However, I'm not sure if that would be sufficient if it's really a copyvio. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 21:45, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
Would I be able to get a second opinion on Power distance? A lot of the writing style seems like an essay, but I can't find any non-mirror matches for the literal snippets that I've searched (e.g. "Hofstede, the famous business anthropologist, developed the controversial cultural dimensions theory.", "In the middle of the last century, Haire, Ghiselli, and Porter"). I'm not sure if anyone has access to any more automated tools to check the article more wholly, as it's quite long.
The vast majority of the article was added in this edit by a user named User:MGMT90018 2015S2 Power distance, which is a little unusual. Looking at the history of the sandbox version beforehand, it seems as if it is a collaborated article (perhaps as part of a college course or something), so it may just need a bit more wikifying, but I wanted to be sure that the article is alright before I spend any major time on cleanup. Thank you. — Sasuke Sarutobi ( talk) 14:25, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Hermelin: The Detective Mouse is a newly created article that has been tagged as a possible copyvio by
User:CorenSearchBot. The
copyvios report shows an 88% match with the website
www
There is this article which does not meet the basic Wikipedia criteria failing WP:N. One of the major violations is also copyright. I have also listed the sources of copyright in detail. If there is an admin here. Please delete it. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hari Parbat. It has more than 6 sources of copyright. Markangle11 ( talk) 15:51, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Please re-check and read my comments. Markangle11 ( talk) 16:39, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
I am concerned that some of the text in the article may be copied from [19]. SovalValtos ( talk) 19:15, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
The blamer is a fundamental tool for tracking down copyvio, but for several months (at least) has consistently given wrong results (Example: ask it who added "a typical face-off" to Premier Badminton League and it replies with this diff; the text was actually added two years earlier, with this edit). The maintainers are listed as Cyberpower678, Hedonil, MusikAnimal, Technical 13 and TParis; I'm pretty sure that neither of the last two has been active for some time now. If any of the remaining three has the time, will and energy to see what's gone wrong and fix it, that would be excellent. But if they don't, could we get some help with getting this back on its feet? Jalexander-WMF, I remember that you stepped in when the DupDetector and Contribution Surveyor seemed to be at risk; might you consider looking at this too? Or anyone else with the necessary skills, for that matter. Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 10:21, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
See Talk:Sausmarez Manor#Copyright concerns. I have no direct evidence that the article breaches copyright because the source does not appear onlne, but experience suggests, that a new editor creating an article over 10k in size from a single source is likely to have inadvertently breached copyright, particularly when the wording seems so polished. I am placing this comment here so that there is a record of my concern, in this central repository and in the hope that others will take a look and seen if my concerns are ill-founded. -- PBS ( talk) 14:01, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
A large part of Bureau of Diplomatic Security, the "Personnel" section, appears to have been copy-pasted from the Bureau's official website. -- AW ( talk) 04:11, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
I have run across a user who has clearly plagiarized in mainspace, and now it appears that he has also done so in userspace, though I can not find a clear rule saying userspace is included. That editor appears to not regard copyright as a serious issue, and has "banned" me from any contact, and I abide by his wishes. Advice? Collect ( talk) 08:40, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Please read its Talk Page, the sections Liberia and Native Americans for the editing and administrative context.
The reverted version that I want to discuss heretobelow is here.
In short, when using the exact wording from the main History of Liberia article, and adding WP:RS sources thereto, with their full attribution and the quotes tag, I was being accused of WP:OR, as presumably these sources did not contain the key "racial segregation" phrase (they did, in fact). While rewording the content, having found even better sources, and quoting directly therefrom as part of the sentence/fragment only, so as to avoid e.g. WP:SYNTH, my edits were administratively reversed for, quote:
Revert copyright violations. The statement on talk page of "verbatim" copying appears to be an admission of copyright violation, though it's is not very clear. But I can tell this material re: Liberia preexists & is indeed b/c part of it is found verbatim at https://laurenkfoster.wordpress.com/2015/02/04/bhm-1-liberia/
Now, when asked how to solve the "damned if I do, damned if I don't" (see the Talk below), the further advice given by the same experienced editor was:
To fix such a thing would involve citing sources that do, which in no way necessitates copying and pasting their content. This is all entirely separate from the copyright issue that drew me here.
I am none the wiser.
1. Did I really commit a copyright violation that may have contributed to the WP:ANI sanctions against me?
2. How does one know if smb's blog content from 2015-02 was copied from the stable Wikipedia article (from which I copied the content in turn, as per above, as previously advised on the Talk Page), and not the other way round?
I hope my query is clear, as it is a somehow complicated to explain. It is also long-term problem for me, as an Wikipedia editor with some experience behind my ears, as I am accused of not being competent therefore by hopping IPs.
Zezen ( talk) 15:53, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Here is a copyright deletion that needs more legal opinions at deletion-review: Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2016 January 2 is a Feist Publications, Inc., v. Rural Telephone Service Co. issue. It involves the choosing of two possible birth dates to display for a single entry in a table of birth dates. Choosing one over the other makes the whole table commentary and makes the whole list copyrightable. The deleter claims that he is a lawyer and has the ability to make the determination. -- Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) ( talk) 00:47, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
only noticed one sentence, but it *is* word for word. Added this to talk page of article:
"However, large-scale religious conversions did not occur until the reign of Ahmad Bakr (1682–1722), who imported teachers, built mosques, and compelled his subjects to become Muslims." https://books.google.com/books?id=oN5LbDnKCt4C&pg=PA55&lpg=PA55 word for word not sure which came first Elinruby (talk) 06:29, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
haven't really looked into how to determine what to do with these; I am there because it's flagged as needing other help. Noting the issue here so someone else can take a look. Elinruby ( talk) 06:35, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Today's featured article Bruce Kingsbury - both the introduction and the main page teaser - use barely changed text from the official citation following his posthumous award of the Vicoria Cross:
Honestly I don't know the copyright rules here in detail. Probably this official wartime text is in the public domain. But still I think it's at least somewhat improper to use text parts in this way, and neither a role model of NPOV. Or is it consensus that this practice is alright? -- KnightMove ( talk) 21:49, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
I was reading "Quantitative Measurement of Scores by Ranks" by Gayatri and Prasad and noticed substantial similarities in the text describing the Spearman's rank correlation coefficient and this wikipedia entry. The text above is a conference paper from the "2011 International Conference on Advancements in Information Technology" and can be accessed HERE. (scroll down to the section on the Spearman CC for the text in question.
The following text from the Gayatri publication is a perfect match with the current wikipedia text:
"In statistics, Spearman's rank correlation coefficient or Spearman's rho, named after Charles Spearman and often denoted by the Greek letter ρ (rho) or as rs, is a non-parametric measure of statistical dependence between two variables. It assesses how well the relationship between two variables can be described using a monotonic function. If there are no repeated data values, a perfect Spearman correlation of +1 or −1 occurs when each of the variables is a perfect monotone function of the other."
The text in question dates from 2011, and the wiki article text is present in the history prior to this date.
216.15.21.56 ( talk) 21:18, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
For Rankings of universities in the United Kingdom#Summary of National Rankings, there is a third column stating the number of times the university appears in the top 10 in one of the three league tables. This draws on partial data from one source (Times/Sunday Times Good University Guide) which has a DMCA takedown notice, so is copyright violated? The column does not exactly state what position they are within the top 10 or whether if they are in the top 10 at all for that ranking (the university is included in the table if it is in the top 10 of either of the 3 rankings), only general statements are made regarding if they are in the top 3/5/10 for all 3 league tables or not. EmyRussell ( talk) 06:05, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
Is it okay to copy headwords, those which are red links in WP, from an astronomy dictionary onto a Wikipedia page in order to make a redlist? Iceblock ( talk) 20:58, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mt10.jpg - Copy from internet ( [25])
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gdp_1960.png - Copy from google book Banzaku ( talk) 10:00, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
The article Coal Wars, specifically this edit by an anonymous editor, copied and pasted directly from this website: http://www.gutenberg.us/articles/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain. Subsequently the same editor edited the material into the current form. My question is if this is a copyright problem (the website mentions the material is Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License) and if so is the current Coal Wars article sufficiently different enough or should it be removed.
Thanks - Killian441 ( talk) 17:54, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
I just came across Kaufering concentration camp which is mostly copy-paste from here http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10006171. Now, there are some pages that use USHMM content with permission (eg Chelmno) but there is no indication of that here... Drow69 ( talk) 13:50, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
I want to make a detailed content of Euclid's Elements book 1 article as hub to link to and from many other articles.
When I did that the first time it was marked as being copyrighted by another and speedely deted see:
As being copyrighted by http://aleph0.clarku.edu/~djoyce/java/elements/bookI/bookI.html.
But what is the exact copyright status of this work and can I reuse the content in an article in wikipedia
The original is Euclid's Elements (circa 300 BC, I guess out of copyright) in ancient greek. the now a days most used english translation is the one of Thomas Little Heath's (5 October 1861 – 16 March 1940) "The thirteen books of Euclid's Elements" (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1908) this version is still printed and sold by Dover books (and also by other publishers, see the Euclid's Elements article.
I really would like to use larger parts of this book, the book is mentioned at https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Elements_of_Euclid There are other translations mentioned but they just use not the same translations and using them is likely to cause confusion.
I am wondering if this is the right place to discuss this problem , I was send here by a link on /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Help_desk/Are_you_in_the_right_place
thanks WillemienH ( talk) 14:11, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
No I don't want to include the complete text I guess around 4 pages in total of the around 250 of book 1,(it is fat pocketbook size ) my idea is to make it an article that links to many other pages and vv. Is the particular translation you want to copy old enough to be PD? that is exactly what I also want to know :) WillemienH ( talk) 16:58, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
I added the link below to the article Sönke Neitzel:
Another editor commented that it may be problematic since it comes from YouTube.
However, I interpret Perennial websites: YT as okay to use YouTube as long as the video comes from the official channel:
AgendaStevePaikin looks official to me. It seems to me that if a program puts a video on their official YT channel, they want us to consume it.
Along the same lines, if a video comes from an official YT channel of a reputable organisation, such as U.S. Army Heritage and Education Center, and delivered by an WP:RS, reputable historian, would it be okay use as sources, in addition to external links?
K.e.coffman ( talk) 01:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
Dear User:MER-C and User:Justlettersandnumbers. This page is on overflow and appears at Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded (see the corresponding talk page). As a result, some parts of this page are not correctly displayed. Perhaps, you should consider splitting this page. Best regards. Pldx1 ( talk) 17:04, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
I have attempted to answer a copyright complaint at Talk:William Churchill (ethnologist). If any of the project's experts would chip in, I'd appreciate it. -- John of Reading ( talk) 08:17, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi. I am unsure if this is the correct place to put this but I am here to basically inform any mods/admins that there is a copyright dispute over the "Have I Been Pwned?" brand and name. This is being brought to attention due to an official Copyright application made via the UK GOV web site for sole rights to the "Have I Been Pwned?" brand and name which now puts the actual entity in full dispute. We are the guys responsible for the .org incarnation of ever so popular "Have I Been Pwned?" service run by Troy Hunt and we are making full claim to having come up with the idea as well much further back than 2013 which is when the main .com incarnation was introduced.
If this is not the correct place to make contact with a mod or administrator in regards to the official Wikipedia "Have I Been Pwned?" page, please could someone point us in the right direction or could an admin get in touch with us please via Talk. We are not privy to how Wikipedia works fully. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hibporg ( talk • contribs) 20:42, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
I was copy-editing Weald, and I had a question, so I asked Checkingfax, and s/he answered my question but also checked with Earwig's Copyvio detector, and found a high degree of similarity between the WP article and the published article. See User talk:Corinne#Weald and Earwig's copyright violation detector. According to Checkingfax, the source is [26]. – Corinne ( talk) 14:33, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
I just happened to come across this article and saw a notice regarding a copyright problem in the section Pará#Indigenous population that has been there for a while. Just thought I'd point it out. – Corinne ( talk) 02:55, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
{{
copyvio-revdel}}
requested. —
JJMC89 (
T·
C)
04:38, 1 April 2016 (UTC)Please see Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Works_that_are_PD_in_US_but_not_in_country_of_origin and comment. Want to make sure I'm in the clear before I add text. Thanks! Calliopejen1 ( talk) 23:23, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Please see Seolhyun Edit Summary. I accidentally made this mistake, and I believe it violates copyright until it is fixed. 78.148.65.71 ( talk) 15:43, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
I've been clashing this week with an editor who appears to be working for a digital media PR firm (evidence at [27]). Beyond any of the issues with POV-pushing and COI, though, one thing that bothers me clicking randomly through her edit history is that a lot of it seems to be plagiarized. I'm reading the policy correctly that this isn't allowed, right?
Edits for comparison:
I saw these in just a few minutes of searching, so unless this is some crazy fluke, I’d be surprised if the problem doesn’t run deeper than these few examples.
Would someone more experienced be willing to take a look at this? I don't feel confident enough in my understanding of Wikipedia policy to try to police it alone. I've tried raising this issue at other noticeboards and have gotten a lot of "not my department" sort of responses, and the editor herself refuses to respond to my concerns. Any advice would be welcome. Thanks, Ellen -- EllenMcGill ( talk) 15:59, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Sure, Justlettersandnumbers, if it’ll help.
LesbianAdvocate: in 1978, Walker's group pushed a bill through Congress that greatly cut capital gains taxes. The Council claimed this would boost financial markets. During this time the Council's board included Democratic "superlawyers" such as Clark Clifford and Edward Bennet Williams and supply-side advocate Arthur Laffer. Robert Keith Gray, a powerful Republican lobbyist, served as president. The Council lobbied hard and released numerous economic studies showing the benefits of their bill. In his book Revolt of the Haves, Robert Kuttner wrote: "Many of these studies later were shown to be based on unverifiable assumptions about how the market was likely to respond to a cut in the capital gains rates; yet they were presented as scientific fact, and by the time the liberal economists reassembled their forces and challenged the methodology in the various tax journals, the political battle was over and Charlie Walker's capital formation council had moved on to other issues." Although the 1978 capital gains tax cut bill passed, the predicted spurt in investment never materialized. Walker argued that other economic factors were in play and in November 1979 he told the Council's annual meeting that the tax cut had saved the economy from yet worse troubles.
Source (Blumenthal): “In 1978, Walker’s group won a swift and decisive campaign in Congress. The council developed a bill that would greatly reduce capital gains taxes. This, Walker claimed, would make the financial markets flush. His group by now had bipartisan support within the Washington establishment. On its board, seated alongside supply-side wizard Arthur Laffer, were venerable Democratic superlawyers Clark Clifford and Edward Bennett Williams; the council’s president was Robert Keith Gray, a high-powered lobbyist with close ties to prominent Republicans. The council lobbied hard … and released studies showing the beneficent effects the bill would have. Robert Kuttner, the economics correspondent for the New Republic, wrote in his book Revolt of the Haves: "Many of these studies later were shown to be based on unverifiable assumptions about how the market was likely to respond to a cut in the capital gains rates; yet they were presented as scientific fact, and by the time the liberal economists reassembled their forces and challenged the methodology in the various tax journals, the political battle was over and Charlie Walker's capital formation council had moved on to other issues."
Although the 1978 capital gains tax cut bill passed Congress overwhelmingly, there was no spurt in investment … Walker, however, was undaunted. In November 1979, he told the annual meeting of the council that the tax cut had saved the economy from deeper troubles.”
As you can see, she changed some of the language in a superficial way (though some exact phrases still slip through like “The Council lobbied hard”, “spurt of investment”, etc.), but no one could mistake this passage for anything but Blumenthal’s work. I assume this is what is meant by close paraphrasing? If a student had turned this in to me, I’d certainly be marking it “See Me After Class.”
For a fifth example, here’s a duplication detector check on another source from her attacks on Dish Network. [33]
I really appreciate your looking into this, and sorry I can’t be more help cleaning this up. I’m a little burnt out by having to battle with this company for two weeks (it is essentially now confirmed a digital PR firm was behind this, and they seem to be controlling multiple accounts) and am hoping to move on to calmer waters. Thanks, Ellen EllenMcGill ( talk) 12:45, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I just added a copyright template to Non-paternity event and wasn't sure if I need to explain it here. An IP editor re-added a data table that I had removed from Misattributed paternity (links to talkpage) before I merged it with Non-paternity event. (See misattributed paternity revision history). The IP editors clearly took the table from the old page, so presumably should have seen my edit summary where I said it was a copyright violation and gave the specific citation from the article. I just reverted the re-addition explaining it was a copyright violation and the IP editor started a conversation on Talk:Non-paternity event (after undoing my revert, but at least a discussion was initiated), so there are more information about the details about the violation on the talkpage. I added the copyright violation template and I'm posting here because I didn't remove the content again yet. It's the data table in the Rates of non-paternity in single births section. I wasn't sure what else to do. The content is a problem for a plethora of reasons, COPYVIO, OR, UNDUE, etc. etc. Thank you! PermStrump (talk) 15:33, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
According to the copyright notice of EUR-Lex, "except where otherwise stated, reuse of the EUR-Lex data for commercial or non-commercial purposes is authorised provided the source is acknowledged ('© European Union, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/, 1998-2016')." Is this consistent with Wikipedia's licensing requirements? Does it mean we can copy legal texts from EUR-Lex into Wikipedia articles? If so, do we have a template for articles that incorporate texts copied from EUR-Lex? — Kpalion (talk) 08:38, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
The article R2-45 links directly to two external web sources (tonyortega.org and wikilinks) that (according to the text in those same sources) carry a unauthorized 3-minute excerpt from a lecture by L. Ron Hubbard, copyrighted by the Church of Scientology. My understanding is that this violates Wikipedia:Verifiability#Copyright_and_plagiarism (rule is duplicated at WP:ELNEVER). The local editors accept that copyright is claimed on the material, [34] but they revert my edit when I remove the link and argue, under various theories, that the Church of Scientology cannot enforce copyright on the material. [35] [36] They also argue that linking is OK if it is for a different purpose.[ibid:"for the purposes of commentary"] Given the volume of the controversy, I reasonably expect that adding a WP:CV template to the page would be reverted and accomplish nothing. I have already been "warned" by an opposing editor that my insistence on following WP:POLICY on this and other issues is "continued tendentious editing". [37] Grammar'sLittleHelper ( talk) 06:53, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
Can I ask for an opinion on Economists' Statement on Climate Change#Text of statement? It quotes pretty much the entirety of the source page, but it's not the kind of thing that can easily be paraphrased. Cordless Larry ( talk) 08:22, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
Adelante Fraternity#History from http://www.adelante.org/about.php ? Naraht ( talk) 17:54, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
A discussion regarding old files with GFDL assumed licenses is taking place at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)#Old_licenses. Please see that discussion if you are interested. — xaosflux Talk 00:29, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Floquenbeam spotted what appeared to be a copyvio in our Hedy Epstein article and removed the relevant text. However, I think this is a case of someone copying the Wikipedia article. I haven't restored it, as I would like someone experienced in dealing with copyright issues to take a look first - all the details are at Talk:Hedy Epstein#Copyvio in "biography" section.
As this has been nominated to appear on WP:ITN, it would be excellent if someone could take a look before it becomes stale. Thank you. Thryduulf ( talk) 22:20, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Could someone please take appropriate steps. I believe this page was copied from the department's own website at [38] and should probably be deleted. Thanks. Taknaran ( talk) 14:55, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello copyright problem solvers. You probably stay busy enough with the reports on this noticeboard. However if you ever want to get more involved in keeping Wikipedia content free of copyright violations, checkout the new CopyPatrol tool. This tool is a web version of User:EranBot/Copyright that shows potential copyright violations as they are being added. Login using OAuth (you don't need to enter your password) to get started. You can click "compare" to compare the diff against the copyright source. Once you've confirmed it's a violation, please fix it and mark the entry as "Page fixed", or "No action needed" if it is not a violation.
Look forward to new features like filtering by WikiProject. This tool is still beta-ish, so please report any problems you encounter (or suggestions) here. Thanks! MusikAnimal (WMF) ( talk) 18:23, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Back in 2010 I add content removed in this edit which was "covers a lot of territory and preys on Montreal" from a source that said "preys on Montreal and covers a lot of territory", so pretty much a copyvio. I was new and guess I thought it was okay. Better you hear it from me. I am terribly sorry. I will check my other edits from around then to be sure that is the only one. Again, I'm sorry. Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 10:16, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
I've been pouring through my edits and have found another case. I've reworded. I am looking for more in other articles, but it is a bit difficult because this was around five years ago and there are plenty of reverse copyvios. Again, I am so sorry. I think I was simply trying to rearrange text in a notepad to avoid copyvios rather than doing a rewrite. I have no excuse, just that explanation. I promise to find any others and fix them. Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 23:27, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
It looks like this article as it stands now is at least a partial lift from this section of a paper from 2010. The "sources" tacked on failed RS. The paper is dated 2010, and I don't know how to (and don't know if there's a functionality to) step back through hundreds of edits in the article history to find when particular text was added. "There's too many edits to go through to find the problem" isn't a valid CSD copyvio reason, so I need a bit of help figuring this out. MSJapan ( talk) 19:22, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
I've removed a request for revdel from the electronic harassment article, as it raises copyright issues which I think should be examined here before choosing how to act on it. The template is
{{copyvio-revdel |url = http://www.google.ch/patents/US5123899 |start = 719308647}}
My concern is this: while uncredited copying of patent material is definitely plagiarism, and thus not allowed in articles, I'm not sure this necessarily counts as copyright infringement. See http://www.uspto.gov/terms-use-uspto-websites , which says, among other things: "Patents are published as part of the terms of granting the patent to the inventor. Subject to limited exceptions reflected in 37 CFR 1.71(d) & (e) and 1.84(s), the text and drawings of a patent are typically not subject to copyright restrictions." I'm not an expert or even particularly knowledgeable about any of this, so I have no idea whether or not this is relevant to this specific case, but I think this situation is worth taking here so more knowledgeable people can comment, or possibly even to the WMF itself for an opinion, as they have their own in-house lawyers for just this purpose.
(Pinging @ Jytdog: for courtesy.) -- The Anome ( talk) 14:20, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
Please review the corrections. Hopefully they will fix the copyright violation problem.
I was doing research for new article when I came across this message on this other talk page (diff: [39]) "The section on impusle response seems to have been lifted from [40]-- AwesomeWells ( talk) 11:55, 24 January 2012 (UTC)". I checked the section - and it does appear to have been copy and pasted from the aforementioned url before January 2012. In other words, it is still there. I looked at another section - and it may be that other sections of this article have also been copy pasted from other copyrighted sites. However, I have no desire to blank the whole page for one section that is "for sure", while the other sections are "maybe". Hopefully someone will look into this matter. Thanks. --- Steve Quinn ( talk) 03:34, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
Hi,
As a native French speaker, I'm not very aware of the procedure and a little bit lost in WP:DCV. Please, excuse me for that and let me explain here what I found out.
The text of this contribution seems to be copy of the official plot summary. On the official website or this trailer posted on Vimeo, the same capitalization can be found and the trailer is dated may 2015, prior to the contribution.
Best regards, -- Lacrymocéphale 21:35, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello!
I've never been here before and I don't know anything about either copyright law or wikipedia's copyright policy, but I did come across this page Driver License Compact which has an antique copyright warning that doesn't seem to be logged in your listing anymore. Or at least I couldn't find it. Not sure if it's really a copyvio or just a misplaced tag or what. Hopefully someone can take a look!! AgnosticAphid talk 22:11, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
A few months ago I uploaded a 1939 UK government document onto commons, which is currently shown in the infobox at White Paper of 1939. It is certainly not in copyright, since UK Crown Copyright for such materials expires 50 years after publication. However, this copy of the document comes from ProQuest, who claim to have copyright (see small text sentence watermarked at the bottom of the document). Their claim has no basis as they have not created it as an original work themselves.
I am bringing this here to check that others agree with my analysis.
Oncenawhile ( talk) 11:09, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm finding that since July 16, all the daily copyright problem subpages to this page are showing a date that's one day earlier than the date of the subpage. For example, all the dates on the July 17 page were July 16, until I changed them manually to July 17, and also fixed the pages for July 16, 19, and 21, but not for later pages. I also discovered that several of these pages (for July 16, 17, and 19) were missing from the day-by-day listing on this project page. Was their omission caused by the same bug? I'm adding them now. Largoplazo ( talk) 19:50, 29 July 2016 (UTC)