Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/OcelotHod

This page has been removed from search engines' indexes.

Contributor copyright investigation

This CCI cleanup subpage has been opened because concerns of repeated copyright violations from the listed contributor have been substantiated and further review of contributions is necessary. Listings are not intended to imply a presumption of bad faith on the part of any contributor, as copyright laws vary widely around the world and many contributors who violate Wikipedia's copyrights policy do so inadvertently through not understanding it or the United States' laws that govern it.

If you are here because of a note on an article's talk page explaining removal of text, please do not restore any removed text without first ensuring that the text does not duplicate, closely paraphrase or plagiarize from a previously published source. You are welcome to use sourced facts that may have been removed to create new content in your own words or to incorporate brief quotations of copyrighted material in accordance with the non-free content policy and guideline.

Instructions

All contributors with no history of copyright problems are welcome to contribute to clean up. Contributors who are the subject of a contributor copyright investigation are among contributors with a history of copyright problems and so are not welcome to directly evaluate their own or others' copyright violations in CCIs. They are welcome to assist with rewriting any problems identified, and are encouraged to assist with accessing offline and paywalled sources.

If contributors have been shown to have a history of extensive copyright violation, it may be assumed without further evidence that all of their major contributions are copyright violations, and they may be removed indiscriminately in accordance with Wikipedia:Copyright violations. Contributors who are the subject of a contributor copyright investigation are among contributors who have been shown to have a history of extensive copyright violation and so all of the below listed contributions may be removed indiscriminately. However, to avoid collateral damage, efforts should be made when possible to verify infringement before removal.

When every section is completed, please alter the listing for this CCI at Template:CCIlist to include the tag "completed=yes". This will alert a clerk that the listing needs to be archived.

{{CCI-open|Contributor name|Day Month Year|completed=yes}}

Text

Examine the article or the diffs linked below.
If the contributor has added creative content, either evaluate it carefully for copyright concerns or remove it.

Evaluating for copyright concerns may include checking the listed sources, spot-checking using search engines, google books, or archives, and looking for major differences in writing style. The background may give some indication of the kinds of copyright concerns that have been previously detected. For older text, mirrors of Wikipedia content may make determining which came first difficult. It may be helpful to look for significant changes to the text after it was entered. Searching for the earlier form of text can help eliminate later mirrors. If you cannot determine which came first, text should be removed presumptively, since there is an established history of copying with the editor in question.
If you remove large portions of text presumptively, place {{subst:CCI|name=Contributor name}} on the article's talk page.
If you specifically locate infringement and remove large portions of the text (or revert to a previous clean version), place {{subst:cclean}} on the article's talk page. The url parameter may be optionally used to indicate source.
If there is insufficient creative content on the page for it to survive the removal of the text or it is impossible to salvage, replace it with {{subst:copyvio}}, linking to the investigation subpage in the url parameter. List the article as instructed at the copyright problems board, but you do not need to notify the contributor. Your note on the CCI investigation page serves that purpose.
To tag an article created by the contributor for presumptive deletion, place {{subst:copyvio|url=see talk}} on the article's face and {{subst:CCId|name=Contributor name}} on the article's talk page. List the article as instructed at the copyright problems board, but you do not need to notify the contributor.

After examining an article:

replace the diffs after the colon on the listing with indication of whether a problem was found (add {{y}}) or not (add {{n}}). If the article is blanked and may be deleted, please indicate as much after the {{y}}. The {{?}} template may be used for articles where you did not determine whether or not a violation occurred, but are prepared to remove the article from consideration – either because the material is no longer present in the article, or it is adequately paraphrased so as to no longer be a violation (please specify which).
Follow with your username and the time to indicate to others that the article has been evaluated and appropriately addressed. This is automatically generated by four tildes (~~~~)

If a section is complete, consider collapsing it by placing {{collapse top}} and {{collapse bottom}} beneath the section header and after the final listing.

Background

OcelotHod

OcelotHod (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Check requested by — MATRIX! (a good person!)_{[citation unneeded]}
This user has done too much overquotation in contravention to WP:NPS. For example, see [1] where they quoted an entire paragraph, that could have been reworded. They haven't been warned, so a block is probably unwarranted. Still, I think an investigation should take place to remove the infringing material. — MATRIX! (a good person!)_{[citation unneeded]} 12:30, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning decline since there hadn't been any warnings yet and only the one example; are there others? I'm not going to open a CCI on a one-off. Wizardman 00:23, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Matrix, I agree with @Wizardman that the quotes aren't a particular issue-- I see some problematic ones, but most are average "reception" sections and are otherwise more of an editorial thing. However, looking through their edits, they recently recieved a warning for Diannaa and I found that most of the "production" sections of their articles are copied from the cited sources (1 2 3 4 5). I think an investigation should be opened, but that it shouldn't list diffs and should just show the articles they've worked on, where the "production" sections can be removed. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 07:03, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MER-C is there a way to just generate just a list of articles edited per the above? Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 06:10, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- No, because it can't be culled. MER-C 19:11, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OcelotHod

OcelotHod (talk | contribs | deleted contribs | logs | block | block log)

This report generated by ContributionSurveyor.java at 2024-01-13T19:10:34.986611725Z. Command line: java org.wikipedia.tools.ContributionSurveyor --user OcelotHod --outfile dump.txt

Instructions

Text

Background

OcelotHod

OcelotHod

Pages 1 to 20

Pages 21 to 40

Pages 41 to 60

Pages 61 to 80

Pages 81 to 100

Pages 101 to 120

Pages 121 to 140

Pages 141 to 160

Pages 161 to 180

Pages 181 to 200

Pages 201 to 220

Pages 221 to 240

Pages 241 to 260

Pages 261 to 280

Pages 281 to 300

Pages 301 to 320

Pages 321 to 340

Pages 341 to 360

Pages 361 to 380

Pages 381 to 400

Pages 401 to 405