Misplaced Pages

:Suspected copyright violations: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 19:13, 11 November 2006 editJmabel (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators90,263 edits Images uploaded by User:Cristian Adrian← Previous edit Revision as of 19:14, 11 November 2006 edit undoJmabel (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators90,263 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 23: Line 23:
*: Tagged as speedy copyvio. {{user|Shuaib123}} informed. -- ] 18:39, 11 November 2006 (UTC) *: Tagged as speedy copyvio. {{user|Shuaib123}} informed. -- ] 18:39, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
* ] -- . Reported at 18:51, 11 November 2006 (UTC) * ] -- . Reported at 18:51, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

==Not wherebot, but...==
... 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?


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. 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.

Revision as of 19:14, 11 November 2006

Shortcut
  • ]

Possible copyvios as detected by Wherebot. You can remove them when you are done.

Copyright permission appears to be pending... see talk --W.marsh 18:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
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. -- ReyBrujo 21:06, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Not wherebot, but...

... 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?

Someone with experience should look into the images uploaded by User:Cristian Adrian. 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.

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 a picture of Unirii Square in Bucharest almost certainly taken no later than 10 years ago (User:Dahn and I both think it is that old), aerial photography of Bucharest, and a very good but (look to the lower right) doctored night shot of Bucharest 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. - Jmabel | Talk 19:13, 11 November 2006 (UTC)