Jump to content

Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2008 August 1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2008-08-01

[edit]
edit

Articles

Skysmith (talk · contribs) had previously assured me that they wrote the original text and that there were no copyright violations when they removed the tag I placed earlier,[2] based on a copyvio from The Guardian. After cleaning up the text plagiarized from The Guardian, today, while adding a citation, I found more plagiarized text from The New York Times. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:06, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please point out the passages which are in copyright violation? Otherwise, as an uninvolved but willing reader, I find it rather difficult to engage in any cleanup of this important article. Note: I believe the two sentences quoted and marked as such (its first Columbia artist, a newly created designation and The appointment grew out of …) are not a copyright violation, but I remain open to be told otherwise. Michael Bednarek (talk) 09:53, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. I've gone line by line through the article, searching out phrases through Google. (See results here.) I have revised potentially problematic sections, where the language followed too closely on a source. (While I was at it, I also added citations for all fact tags that I could.) The strongest source infringement I found was to this archived version of Sacks' original website, here. The article as it stands should be copyright violation free, although there were a couple of potentially problematic phrases for which I could not identify a source. (Example: "Sacks’ writings have been translated to 21 languages", here, is duplicative of the text at an official bio, "Dr. Sacks' writings have been translated into 21 languages" (here). That source is not old enough to positively identify infringement. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:17, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Copyvio article deleted. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:28, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Duplication substantial, but contributor not advised. Have advised. 7 day grace period extends to August 15. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:07, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lacking further action from anyone else, I have created a stub to replace the vio version. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:30, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The violation seems to be the other way around, as the article was established in 2006 and the website is "copyrighted" 2007. The Internet Archives supports a 2007 creation for that external site, here, as no earlier versions are archived. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:01, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Notice to contributor how to verify. 7 day grace period ends August 15. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:54, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No vio detected. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:48, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The whole article was copied from the website, including various subpages. The internet archives reveals that the text predates the establishment of the article. Alterations to text are minimal, and there is no non-infringing version in history. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:38, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Copyvio the other way around. Wikipedia article predates the blog by over a year. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 02:28, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Version from temp page placed. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 02:23, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see anything vioish. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:35, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Images

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Copyright_problems/2008_August_1&oldid=229127070"