Misplaced Pages:Suspected copyright violations: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 19:14, 11 November 2006 editJmabel (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators90,254 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 17:38, 18 October 2019 edit undoHut 8.5 (talk \| contribs)Administrators62,802 editsm Reverted edits by 83.31.3.13 (talk) to last version by Premeditated ChaosTag: Rollback
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{historical}}
⚫	{{shortcut\|]}}
			__FORCETOC__
	Possible copyvios as detected by ]. You can remove them when you are done.
			{{pp-move-indef\|small=yes}}
	* ] -- . Reported at 17:03, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
		⚫	{{shortcut\|WP:SCV}}
	:Copyright permission appears to be pending... see talk --] 18:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
			{{For\|images and media suspected of violating copyright\|Misplaced Pages:Files for discussion}}
	::Yes, I added a comment. It is basically a "But I wrote that, I give permission to use it" situation. I don't think these editors are either pointing out what GFDL means to the author, or the author does not comprehend that. That is why I usually use "extreme examples" ("So, I will pick your text, change words to damage your product reputation, and post it in my site without you being able to claim I am breaking your copyright") with people to make them understand it is better to just write an article from scratch than requesting permission. -- ] 21:06, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
			{{dablink\|To report suspected copyright violations, please use ]}}
	* ] -- . Reported at 22:36, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
			{{/doc}}
	*: First paragraph is copyvio. the controversy section appears to be original. No action taken so far. -- ] 01:59, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
			{{/2016-09-01}}
	* ] -- . Reported at 12:30, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
			{{/2016-09-02}}
	*: Tagged as speedy copyvio. {{user\|Erdenesai}} informed. -- ] 12:43, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
			{{/2016-09-03}}
	*:: Rewritten by another user, copyvio still in the first two versions of the history. If that is not a problem, just delist this entry. -- ] 16:28, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
			{{/2016-09-04}}
	* ] -- . Reported at 00:57, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
			{{/2016-09-05}}
	*: Leading paragraph is copyvio. Maybe it is better to just rewrite it, or delete the article pasting the table and creating a new leading. No action taken so far. -- ] 01:18, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
			{{/2016-09-06}}
	* ] -- . Reported at 05:22, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
			{{/2016-09-07}}
	*: Apparent false positive. -- ] 07:00, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
			{{/2016-09-08}}
	* ] -- . Reported at 10:49, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
			{{/2016-09-09}}
	*: Tagged as speedy copyvio. {{user\|Jj2006}} informed. -- ] 13:33, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
			{{/2016-09-10}}
	* ] -- . Reported at 11:50, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
			{{/2016-09-11}}
	*: The page was from ]. I'm guessing this is a false positive, though the URL given is down at this moment, so I can't confirm. --] 17:12, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
			{{/2016-09-12}}
	*::Indeed. I considered that too, but since mobyell.com is not being listed as a ], I thought I would keep it listed here until the site is up again. I believe it is a relatively new site, as Yahoo has no cached version of their pages and Netcraft has no statistics about the site. Since this is a split, I guess we can treat this as a false positive, maybe leaving a note in the article for future reference in case mobyell.com ever comes back. -- ] 17:24, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
			{{/2016-09-13}}
	* ] -- . Reported at 18:35, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
			{{/2016-09-14}}
	*: Tagged as speedy copyvio. {{user\|Shuaib123}} informed. -- ] 18:39, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
			{{/2016-09-15}}
	* ] -- . Reported at 18:36, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
			{{/2016-09-16}}
	*: Tagged as speedy copyvio. {{user\|Shuaib123}} informed. -- ] 18:39, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
			{{/2016-09-17}}
	* ] -- . Reported at 18:51, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
			{{/2016-09-18}}

			{{/2016-09-19}}
	==Not wherebot, but...==
			{{/2016-09-20}}
	... I couldn't see where to put issues about patterns suggesting possible copyright violations. If this is not the place, can someone please move this appropriately?
			{{/2016-09-21}}

			{{/2016-09-22}}
	Someone with experience should look into the images uploaded by ]. He's had a tendency after being warned by Orphanbot to simply tag things as GFDL, but it's really hard for me to believe that is accurate.
			{{/2016-09-23}}

			{{/2016-09-24}}
	It is possible that some of his images are his own and are OK, but quite a few look very professional and not recent. Either he is a professional quality photographer, whose work includes ] almost certainly taken no later than 10 years ago (] and I both think it is that old), ], and a very good but (look to the lower right) doctored ] '''or''' he is uploading other people's images. The relatively low resolutions of these photos is also atypical of people uploading their own digital or scanned photography. I asked a question on the talk page of the Unirii Square question, which is the one that initially got my attention (I also added a caption to it), then I noticed that the issue might be more general. - ] \| ] 19:13, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
			{{/2016-09-25}}
			{{/2016-09-26}}
			{{/2016-09-27}}
			{{/2016-08-28}}
			{{/2016-09-29}}
			{{/2016-09-30}}

Latest revision as of 17:38, 18 October 2019

This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference.
Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump.

Shortcut

WP:SCV

For images and media suspected of violating copyright, see Misplaced Pages:Files for discussion. To report suspected copyright violations, please use Misplaced Pages:Copyright problems

This page lists possible copyright violations as detected by CorenSearchBot. If CorenSearchBot is down, please e-mail Coren or leave him a message.

To comply with copyright policy and Terms of Use, material imported to Misplaced Pages that infringes copyright should, as a general rule, be removed. While brief, clearly marked excerpts of copyrighted text are permitted under non-free content policy and guideline, text can otherwise only be imported if it is verifiably public domain or licensed compatibly with the Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike license. Aside from brief, clearly marked excerpts, information taken from non-free sources cannot be presented in identical language and must be sufficiently rewritten to avoid constituting an unauthorized derivative work.

Instructions

Evaluate each listing to see what steps have been taken or may be necessary and tag their current status here. The template {{SCV}} may be used for this purpose by placing it at the end of the report, on the same line. Do not remove listings, even if the article has been deleted or no violation was found.

Check the tagged source to see if it is public domain, compatibly licensed or a Misplaced Pages mirror.
- If the source is public domain or licensed compatibly, check to see if duplicated content is properly attributed in the article. Public domain sources should be attributed in accordance with Misplaced Pages:Plagiarism. Contributions licensed under CC-BY-SA and GFDL must be attributed. If necessary, please put a link to the original source of the material at the foot of the article and on the article's talk page. If the source is CC-BY-SA or CC-BY-SA-compatible only, please note that. Attribution templates may be useful.
- If something is copied from a Misplaced Pages mirror, it may still be a problematic article. Make sure it isn't a repost of deleted content or fallout from a copy and paste move. If it is a repost, an administrator may need to be consulted to restore the history for proper attribution. If it appears that a page was moved to a new location, it may be a cut-and-paste copy instead of an actual move, and those must be fixed by an administrator otherwise the contribution history is no longer attached to the text, which is violating the copyright of the contributors. On the other hand, it may catch cases of editors splitting an existing page; if the source page is clear in the new page's history through edit summaries then this would be a false positive and the tag put on the new page needs to be removed. If the split is not properly attributed, please repair in accordance with Misplaced Pages:Copying within Misplaced Pages.
Blatant copyright infringements where no permission or ownership is asserted and no untainted version exists should be tagged for speedy deletion under WP:CSD#G12 with {{db-copyvio}}. Mark them as such on this list, but do not remove them. Such articles are sometimes recreated after deletion and may need additional review to ensure they have been completely rewritten.
Mark non-blatant copyright infringements as well as blatant infringements where permission or ownership is asserted for review at Copyright problems. Replace the article with {{subst:copyvio|url=''source''}}, follow the directions on that template for notifying the contributor and note below the listing that the article has been blanked for later review.
Non-violations (such as duplicating track listings) or corrected violations should be noted on the list.
CSBot generally leaves notices for contributors. It may be a good idea to ensure that it has done so, if the problem was not repaired. You may also wish to communicate further with the contributor if clarification seems needed about copyright or verification process. Please remember to remain civil and be mindful of the specific application of "assume good faith" to copyright cleanup. If a contributor's talk page history suggests a pattern of copyright issues, additional action may be necessary in accordance with Misplaced Pages:Copyright problems#Repeated copyright violations.

Categories: