Jump to content

Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2010 November 10

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

10 November 2010[edit]

Suspected copyright violations (CorenSearchBot reports) (all reviewed as of 19 November

SCV for 2010-11-10 Edit

2010-11-10 (Suspected copyright violations)[edit]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. JodyB talk 14:39, 10 November 2010 (UTC) JodyB talk 14:39, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • No copyright concern. False positive. JodyB talk 14:37, 10 November 2010 (UTC) JodyB talk 14:37, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. JodyB talk 14:34, 10 November 2010 (UTC) JodyB talk 14:34, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. JodyB talk 13:09, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Permission plausible Article blanked and contributor notified how to proceed. An administrator should delete if permission is not verified within five to seven days of the timestamp. VernoWhitney (talk) 15:30, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Permission plausible Article blanked and contributor notified how to proceed. An administrator should delete if permission is not verified within five to seven days of the timestamp. VernoWhitney (talk) 15:30, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. VernoWhitney (talk) 15:30, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. VernoWhitney (talk) 15:30, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Copyright investigations (manual article tagging)[edit]
completed listings
  • If you can't identify a source and there's not evidence that the contributor has copied elsewhere, generally the talk page is just tagged with {{cv-unsure}} since we'd rather not delete content if it's not likely copyvio - and the author could just be a good at writing instead of copying it from somewhere. In this case there are even typos in the initial edit, "posivite" and "practial" which are small indications that this may actually be fresh content. VernoWhitney (talk) 03:27, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I did, so it's COI and/or copyvio. I was just saying that it might not be copyvio. I'm awake enough now to do some more research, and I found that the article was originally at AACT High School and written by HCSTAACT (talk · contribs), so that confirms COI. Also skimming through I found this edit copied from here, so that confirms copyvio, too. :/ VernoWhitney (talk) 12:46, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • No copyright concern. False positive. Reverse copyvio; see evidence of evolution on Wikipedia here. Haven't added a tag since it's been largely rewritten in the past few days. VernoWhitney (talk) 14:24, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done -- Text has been referenced. Slightly revised and used quotes to address copyvio. Other concerns on talk page are determined to be a reverse copyvio. — CactusWriter (talk) 17:43, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. One of the links was dead. I could not confirm that content from it was clean. Accordingly, I have replaced. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:13, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:11, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. VernoWhitney (talk) 14:38, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. Since we can'tdetermine what's changed, I've replaced both the dubious and the confirmed copyright problem with some sourced text. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:02, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • ? I think the rewrite needs more work and have said so at the talk page, with explanation. I would appreciate a second opinion.--Moonriddengirl (talk) 21:43, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • agree with analysis. Relisting under today. MLauba (Talk) 13:21, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Would appreciate another admin to review the current version. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:01, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Turned out that one of the sources was readily available online. I've compared; problems extended byond the examples (as you would expect) and were ported over to the proposed rewrite. Strangely, a "new" contributor actually added back the example copyvio to the write. Caution given at User talk:Wikiclass emc. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:33, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Copyright_problems/2010_November_10&oldid=1138425662"