Wikipedia:Copyright problems
This page has an administrative backlog that requires the attention of willing administrators. Please replace this notice with {{no admin backlog}} when the backlog is cleared. |
This page is for listing and discussing possible copyright problems involving text on Wikipedia, including pages suspected to be copyright violations. Listings typically remain for at least five days before review and closure by a copyright problems clerk or administrator. During this time, interested contributors are invited to offer feedback, propose revisions, or request copyright permission.
Listed pages appear in the bottom section of the page. For additional guidance, see Instructions for dealing with text-based copyright concerns.
To add a new listing, go to today's section.
Instructions
Handling previously published text on Wikipedia
Under the United States law that governs Wikipedia, copyright is automatically assumed as soon as any content (text or other media) is created in a physical form. An author does not need to apply for or claim copyright, for a copyright to exist.
Only one of the following allows works to be reused in Wikimedia projects:
A) Explicit Statement. An explicit statement (by the author, or by the holder of the rights to the work) that the material is either:
- in the public domain,
- licensed with the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA), or
- otherwise compatible with CC-BY-SA.
B) Public Domain. If the work is inherently in the public domain, due to its age, source or lack of originality; or
C) Fair Use. United States law allows for fair use of copyrighted content, and (within limits) Wikipedia does as well. Under guidelines for non-free content, brief selections of copyrighted text may be used, but only if clearly marked and with full attribution.
Even if a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, material should be properly attributed in accordance with Wikipedia:Plagiarism in respect of local customs and attribution requirements of compatible licenses. If the terms of the compatible license are not met, use of the content can constitute a violation of copyright even if the license is compatible.
Repeated copyright violations
Contributors who repeatedly post copyrighted text or images may be subject to contributor copyright investigations, to ensure the removal from the project of all copyright infringement. Contributors who repeatedly post copyrighted material after appropriate warnings will be blocked from editing, to protect the project; see 17 United States Code § 512.
Instructions for dealing with text-based copyright concerns
Blatant infringement
Pages exhibiting blatant copyright infringements may be speedily deleted if:
- Content was copied from a source which does not have a license compatible with Wikipedia, and was not copied from a mirror source.
- The page can neither be restored to a previous revision without infringing content, nor would the page be viable if the infringing content were removed.
- There is no credible assertion of public domain, fair use, or a free license.
To nominate an article for speedy deletion for copyright concerns, add one of these to the page:
{{db-copyvio|url=insert URL of source here}}
{{db-copyvio|describe non-web source here}}
Both of these templates will generate a notice that you should give the contributor of the content. This is important to help ensure that they do not continue to add copyrighted content to Wikipedia. An administrator will examine the article and decide whether to delete it or not. You should not blank the page in this instance.
Suspected or complicated infringement
If infringement is not blatant or the speedy deletion criteria do not apply:
- Remove or rewrite the infringing text avoiding copyright violations or revert the page to before the text was added.
- The infringing text will remain in the page history, and it may be tagged for {{copyvio-revdel}}. Administrators hold discretion on the appropriateness of revision deletion for each case. Please note the reason for removal in the edit summary and at the article's talk page (you may wish to use {{subst:cclean}}). Please identify and alert the contributor of the material to the problem, unless advised not to. The template {{Uw-copyright}} may be used for this purpose.
- However, if all revisions have copyright problems, the removal of the copyright problem is contested, reversion/removal is otherwise complicated, or the article is eligible for presumptive deletion:
- Place one of the following above the infringing text:
{{subst:copyvio|url=insert URL here}}
{{subst:copyvio|identify non-web source here}}
- Optionally place
{{subst:Copyvio/bottom}}
below if only some of the article infringes.
- Go to today's section and add:
{{subst:article-cv|PageName}}
from [insert URL or identify non-web source here] ~~~~
- to the bottom of the list. Put the page's name in place of "PageName". If you do not have a URL, enter a description of the source. (This text can be copied from the top of the template after substituting it and the page name and url will be filled for you.) If there is not already a page for the day, as yours would be the first listing, please add a header to the top of the page using the page for another date as an example.
- Advise the contributor of the listing at their talk page. The template on the now blanked page supplies a notice you may use for that purpose.
Instructions for special cases
- Probable copyvios without a known source: If you suspect that a page contains a copyright violation, but you cannot find a source for the violation (so you can't be sure that it's a violation), do not list it here. Instead, place
{{cv-unsure|~~~|2=FULL_URL}}
on the page's talk page, but replace FULL_URL with the full URL of the page version that you believe contains a violation. (To determine the URL, click on "Permanent link" in the toolbox area, and copy the URL.) - One contributor has verifiably introduced copyright problems into multiple pages or files and assistance is needed in further review: See Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations.
Instructions for handling image copyright concerns
Image copyright concerns are not handled on this board. For images that are clear copyright violations, follow the procedure for speedy deletion; otherwise list at Files for Discussion. To request assistance with contributors who have infringed copyright in multiple articles or files, see Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations.
Responding to articles listed for copyright investigation
Any contributor is welcome to help investigate articles listed for copyright concerns, although only administrators, copyright problems board clerks, and VRT (formerly OTRS) agents should remove {{copyvio}} tags and mark listings resolved.
Assistance might include supplying evidence of non-infringement (or, conversely, of infringement) or obtaining and verifying permission of license. You might also help by rewriting problematic articles or removing infringing text (without removing {{copyvio}}).
Supplying evidence of non-infringement
Articles listed here are suspect of copyright concern, but not every article contains infringement. The content may be on Wikipedia first, in the public domain, compatibly licensed, or falls below threshold of originality for copyright. Sometimes, the person who placed it here is the copyright owner of freely-licensed material and this simply needs to be verified.
Information can be provided to prove compatible licensing or public domain status under the listing of the article on the copyright problems board or on the talk page of the article. A link or a clear explanation can be very helpful when a clerk or administrator evaluates the matter. As listings are not immediately addressed on the board, it may take a few days after you make your note before a response is provided.
If the article is tagged for {{copyvio}}, you should allow an administrator or copyright problems clerk to remove the tag. If the article is tagged for {{copy-paste}} or {{close paraphrasing}}, you may remove the tag from the article when the problem is addressed (or disproven), but please do not close the listing on the copyright problems board itself.
Obtaining/verifying permission
Sometimes material was placed on Wikipedia with the permission of the copyright owner. Sometimes copyright owners are willing to give permission (and proper license!) even if it was not.
Any contributor can write to the owner of copyright and check whether they gave or will give permission (or maybe they in fact posted it here!). See Wikipedia:Example requests for permission. In either case, unless a statement authorizing the material under compatible license is placed online at the point of original publication, permission will need to be confirmed through e-mail to the Wikimedia Foundation. See Wikipedia:Confirmation of permission. If a compatible license is placed online at the point of original publication, please provide a link to that under the listing for the article on the copyright problems board or on the talk page of the article.
Please note that it may take a few days for letters to clear once they are sent. Do not worry if the content is deleted prematurely; it can be restored at any point usable permission is logged.
Rewriting content
Any contributor may rewrite articles that are or seem to be copyight problems to exclude duplicated or closely paraphrased text. When articles or sections of articles are blanked as copyright problems, rewriting is done on a temporary page at Talk:PAGENAME/Temp so that the new material can be copied over the old. (The template blanking the article will link to the specific temporary page.)
Please do not copy over the version of the article that is a copyright problem as your base. All copied content, or material derived from it, should be removed first. Other content from the article can be used, if there is no reason to believe that it may be a copyright issue as well. It is often a good idea – and essential when the content is copied from an inaccessible source such as a book – to locate the point where the material entered the article and eliminate all text added by that contributor. This will help avoid inadvertently continuing the copyright issues in your rewrite. If you use any text at all from the earlier version of the article, please leave a note on the listing to alert the administrator or clerk who review the rewrite. The history of the old article will then have to be retained. (If the original turns out to be non-infringing, the two versions of the article can be merged.)
Rewrites can be done directly in articles that have been tagged for {{close paraphrasing}} and {{copy-paste}}, with those tags removed after the rewrite is complete.
Please review Wikipedia:Copy-paste and the linked guidelines and policies within it if necessary to review Wikipedia's practices for handling non-free text. Reviewing Wikipedia:Plagiarism is also helpful, particularly where content is compatibly licensed or public domain. Repairing these issues can sometimes be as simple as supplying proper attribution.
Copyright owners who submitted their own work to Wikipedia (or people editing on their behalf)
If you submitted work to Wikipedia which you had previously published and your submission was marked as a potential infringement of copyright, then stating on the article's talk page that you are the copyright holder of the work (or acting as his or her agent), while not likely to prevent deletion, helps. To completely resolve copyright concerns, it is sufficient to either:
- Link to a note permitting reuse under the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 4.0 International License (CC-BY-SA) and the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts) at the site of the original publication; or
- Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation, ideally using the email template at WP:CONSENT.
See also Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
Please note that it may take a bit of time for letters and e-mails to clear once they are sent. Do not worry if the content is deleted prematurely; it can be restored at any point usable permission is logged. Your e-mail will receive a response whether the permission is usable or not. If you have not received a response to your letter within two weeks, it is a good idea to follow up.
One other factor you should consider, however, is that content that has been previously published elsewhere may not meet Wikipedia's specific guidelines and policies. If you are not familiar with these policies and guidelines, please review especially the core policies that govern the project. This may help prepare you to deal with any other issues with the text that may arise.
Should you choose to rewrite the content rather than release it under the requisite license, please see above.
Clerks and patrolling administrators
Copyright clerks
For a more complete description of clerks and their duties, as well as a list of active clerks, please see Wikipedia:Copyright problems/Clerks.
Copyright clerks are experienced editors on Wikipedia who are familiar with copyright and non-free content policies and its enforcement. They are trusted to evaluate and close listings and request administrative actions when necessary. Clerks are periodically reviewed by other clerks and patrolling administrators.
Copyright problems board administrators
For a more complete description of administrators on Wikipedia, please see Wikipedia:Administrators.
Any administrator may work the copyright problems board. This may involve evaluating listings personally or using tools as necessary to complete closures by clerks. Clerks have been evaluated in their work, and their recommendations may be implemented without double-checking, although any administrator is welcome to review recommendations and discuss them with the clerks in question.
Closing listings
Pages can be processed at any time by anyone, but are not formally closed until a clerk or administrator verifies that all problems are resolved. Pages listed for presumptive deletion stay open for a minimum of 7 days before being processed. VRT agents may close listings at any time.
For advice for resolving listings, see:
- Wikipedia:Copyright problems/Advice for admins (VRT agents, see section there)
- Wikipedia:Copyright problems/Advice for clerks
{{CPC}} may be used to denote resolutions of listings by administrators, clerks and VRT agents.
Listings of possible copyright problems
Older than 7 days
- Manila Hotel (history · last edit · rewrite) from https://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=travel&res=9503E2DB1739F934A35752C1A964948260. Somehow, this got past GA review. ⸺RandomStaplers 02:54, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. The4lines |||| (Talk) (Contributions) 19:05, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Columbia University (history · last edit · rewrite) from http://siris-artinventories.si.edu/ipac20/ipac.jsp?profile=all&source=~!siartinventories&uri=full=3100001~!20526~!0#focus. This contributor has had an investigation opened against them.⸺RandomStaplers 05:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- from multiple sources, some outlined in this GAR but it is very likely that there are more, and these issues are longstanding. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:22, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Lou Gehrig (history · last edit · rewrite) from https://copyvios.toolforge.org/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&oldid=1234612847&action=compare&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmoregehrig.tripod.com%2Fid12.html. Copyvio by an IP committed on March 16th, 2014.⸺RandomStaplers 05:40, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. Wizardman 02:20, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- The Slave Route Project (history · last edit · rewrite) from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/themes/dialogue/the-slave-route/ (the UNESCO website URL is not working anymore, but has been archived here, and here or on UNESCO's webarchive). NB: the creation of the article edit mentioned this URL as source, and this UNESCO webpage is for "personal, non-commercial use". Ruthven (msg) 08:12, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Soraya Tarzi (history · last edit · rewrite) from https://vc.bridgew.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1577&context=jiws.
Looks likethe copyvio definitely dates from the very first version of 07:39, 17 January 2007 by a user who did 38 edits and then stopped editing in 2007. The copyvio'd text has been adjusted quite a bit by later editors who didn't notice that the language style sounded suspiciously like an academic original writing rather than an encyclopedic summary. It would be good to put the sources that happen to be in the middle of copyvio'd sections on the talk page, whichI'll probably doI've done, so that they're available for reconstruction after the copyvio is handled. Boud (talk) 17:00, 23 August 2024 (UTC) (clarify and update Boud (talk) 17:12, 23 August 2024 (UTC)) (clarify 'definitely' is from the first version Boud (talk) 17:17, 23 August 2024 (UTC))
- Comment: simply delete the contested information. It is uneccessary to delete a highly notable article or even sections with otherwise good well referenced information simply because some other information in the article is contested. Nor is it necessary to break up the article with big templates. Simply remove the old copywright violation, and the problem is solved. If someone wish to reintroduce it, they will have to defend it then. --Aciram (talk) 22:08, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. Sennecaster (Chat) 17:28, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Janet Biggs (history · last edit · rewrite) from https://www.jbiggs.com/about. I stripped some recently-added promotional text out of the lead and didn't realise at that point that the text was from the artist's website. Looking at the article now, Earwig is still reporting 84% similarity to that page. My feeling is that this is a result of the same work names, venue names, press coverage details, but wanted to check here in case more should be removed. Thanks. Tacyarg (talk) 08:08, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
- Lyla in the Loop (history · last edit · rewrite) from [1]. don't know the exact website here, don't feel like playing the game rn NotAGenious (talk) 12:09, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Campus of the University of Southern California (history · last edit · rewrite) from https://fpm.usc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/AMMA-Adaptive-Mitigation-Management-Approach.pdf. — Diannaa (talk) 14:25, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. Wizardman 01:53, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- Bullacephalus (history · last edit · rewrite)from [2]. Sentences added by This user seems to be possibly copyright violation. For example, sentences in "Geological/paleoenvironmental information and historical information and discovery" section is copied from introduction of the paper. I haven't checked for all the sentences but it is quite possible that many of texts are directly copied from papers. User added those texts also uploaded this image[3] to commons from the paper, seems copyvio and in the way of deletion. Ta-tea-two-te-to (talk) 12:40, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Paper PDF, maybe better to use comparison,[4] although it is unable to use with Earwig's Copyvio Detector. Ta-tea-two-te-to (talk) 08:04, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Henry Yevele (history · last edit · rewrite) from https://doi-org.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/30220. With the exception of the list of works at the end, the entire article is a close paraphrase of selected passages in the article on Yevele in the ODNB. Some passages (e.g., paragraphs 2, 3, 5, 6 in the "Early life and career" section) are copied and pasted verbatim or with trivial changes of wording. Copyvio goes back to the original creation of the article. The article creator (inactive since 2011, apart from a single edit in 2022) was also responsible for similar copyright violations recently removed from the article on Lorenzo Campeggio (see Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2024 August 10), which was created on the same day (24 April 2005). There may be others as well. Crawdad Blues (talk) 15:25, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
New listings
New listings are made on daily reports transcluded on this page and are not directly added to it. To add a new listing, please go to today's section. Instructions for adding new listings can be found at Instructions for listing text-based copyright concerns. Editors may resolve issues within listings by removing the copyrighted content or rewriting content on the temporary pages at any time, save for presumptive deletion. See the section on responding for more information.
- Nur_Jahan (history · last edit · rewrite)from various books such as: [5] and other sources. Nearly every paragraph shows up in either google books or similar, some maybe wiki-originated but the books clearly are not [6] I don't think it's possible to recover this without starting again, it looks like the history of this article is littered with copyright violations from pretty much day one through to today. JeffUK 09:33, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- Draft:List of Scott the Woz episodes (history · last edit · rewrite) from https://m.imdb.com/title/tt8788222/episodes/?ref_=tt_ep_epl, https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8788222/episodes/?season=2. — Diannaa (talk) 12:16, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- I was looking at this too, I think the original source is actually https://open.spotify.com/show/1g6Urt3QZpHIKg9aavAtDk. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 19:49, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. — Diannaa (talk) 13:54, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
- Scottish Barony Register (history · last edit · rewrite) See the talk page. Johnj1995 (talk) 04:10, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
- Newhall House and Estate (history · last edit · rewrite) The great majority of the article is directly lifted from the following 3 sources: [7] [8] [9] Axad12 (talk) 09:03, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
- Siena College (history · last edit · rewrite) I recently removed an amount of copyvio material from this article following a discussion at WP:COIN, here: [10]. I'd be grateful if action could be taken re: revdel. Axad12 (talk) 21:32, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
- Attorney General v. Hitchcock (history · last edit · rewrite) from https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2799&context=dlj. — Diannaa (talk) 21:48, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
- Jinchao Xu (history · last edit · rewrite). I have reverted some recent text added from the subject's university profile or from here. Earwig is still reporting high percentages of the article similar to those pages, however. I cannot tell which came first, those pages or the text in the Wikipedia article - the text in the article was added in 2018, and internet archive versions of those sites don't go back that far. Hoping someone else can work this out. Thanks. Tacyarg (talk) 18:26, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
- Peter McLaren (history · last edit · rewrite). I removed some content that was unambigiously in violation of copyright, but for the rest, I cannot tell what would qualify and what wouldn't. I'd appreciate it if someone with expertise in this could take a look. Thanks! Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) (Talk) 21:08, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
- A. Rex Rivolo (history · last edit · rewrite) from https://www.therivolocollection.com/about-rivolo/ https://www.pbs.org/video/grounded-1702070872/. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 07:49, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
- Khilji invasion of Jaisalmer (history · last edit · rewrite) concerns raised at WP:ANI#Apparent sock puppetry and copyvio asilvering (talk) 20:08, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
- Seige of Aligarh (1785) (history · last edit · rewrite) concerns raised at WP:ANI#Apparent sock puppetry and copyvio asilvering (talk) 20:08, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
Potential copyvio issues at Royal National Institute of Blind People
I'm not sure what to do here. Another editor has repeatedly added text closely paraphrased from the organisation's about us page to the article's lede. They have added potentially copyrighted material in this edit and this edit that closely paraphrase the organisation's about us page.
I have raised the issue on the article's talk page and I have asked them on their talk page to please be mindful of WP's copyright policies. They responded with this edit which closely paraphrases the same text but this time sourced to the RNIB's partner organisations, the NHS and Newcastle city council.
I believe that I may have reverted them twice, it's becoming tedious and I don't want to fall foul of the three revert rule.
Therefore, firstly does WP's copyvio policy take precident over the three revert rule?
And secondly, can we have a second set of eyes on the article to check it for copyrighted material because I don't feel I am being heard by this editor and I don't feel that my concerns about the article's copyright issues have been adequately addressed.𝔓420°𝔓Holla 10:16, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
Georgiana Morson
Georgiana Morson (history · last edit · rewrite) from https://spartacus-educational.com/DICmorsonG.htm. Not clear to me that Georgiana Morson is notable, so just delete. Urania Cottage where she worked is notable, I believe, and it would be better to have an article on that topic in which she is mentioned. Charles Matthews (talk) 16:13, 18 September 2024 (UTC) Grand Rapids Medical Mile (history · last edit · rewrite) from [11]. The article's first edit on 6 November 2017 seems to be a direct copy of the blog. The blog's url seems to suggest it was written in March 2017, but I can't find an explicit date on it and Internet Archive has no record of it before November 2023. So I want to check which is a copy of which before requesting deletion. I'd be grateful if someone could take a look and advise please. Also to note, I have already put a G12 on Lemmen-Holton Cancer Pavilion, but that article seems to have been copied from Grand Rapids Medical Mile, so whether that should be deleted probably depends on the outcome of this one. Thanks, Mgp28 (talk) 19:14, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
- I've just realised I wasn't at the start of the article's history. The article dates back to 2007, and I think it looks less like the article is a copyright violation. I've left it blanked for now until there's a second opinion. Mgp28 (talk) 19:23, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2024 September 20
Footer
Wikipedia's current date is 20 September 2024. Put new article listings in Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2024 September 20. Files should be handled by speedy deletion or Wikipedia:Files for discussion.