Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2009 October 31

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

31 October 2009

Suspected Copyright Violations (CorenSearchBot reports)
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. --– Toon 17:02, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. --Theleftorium 10:41, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. Awaiting permission from site's webmaster to use part of the content, but most of it has been removed already. --— The Earwig @ 23:32, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. --Theleftorium 10:53, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article redirected to another target. — The Earwig @ 23:20, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • No copyright concern. Material PD or appropriately licensed for use. --Theleftorium 10:58, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. --MLauba (talk) 08:53, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. --Theleftorium 20:38, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • No copyright concern. Material PD or appropriately licensed for use. --Theleftorium 20:40, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • No copyright concern. Material PD or appropriately licensed for use. --Theleftorium 20:48, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. --Theleftorium 20:50, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. --GrooveDog • i'm groovy. 01:37, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. --Theleftorium 21:02, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • No copyright concern. Material PD or appropriately licensed for use. --Theleftorium 21:04, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Copyright Investigations (Manual article tagging)
  • Considerable portions of text in the history section seem to be drawn from [3]. For example, the article says, "By 1931 Atkinson had copyrighted a braille/inkprint calendar. In 1938 Braille Institute published the first Merriam-Webster dictionary in braille. The 32-volume dictionary included, for the first time, a braille code for pronunciation." The source says, "By 1931 he had copyrighted a braille/inkprint calendar. In 1938 Braille Institute published the first Merriam Webster dictionary in braille in 32 volumes, including for the first time a braille code for pronunciation." Permission has been asserted for this, but not verified. Please see WP:DCM for the process. For other material, I believe the article needs to be thoroughly checked or revised. For instance, my automated detector- which tends only to pick up larger runs of text-picked up the following: [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16]. I don't see any assertion of permission for this. The website bears a copyright notice. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:15, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:12, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • No copyright concern. Material PD or appropriately licensed for use. OTRS --Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:17, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • It was immediately rephrased to avoid similarities. Racepacket (talk) 03:58, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. Temp space deleted. --MLauba (talk) 16:49, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Prva_HNL (history · last edit) from http://www.budgetairlinefootball.co.uk/130901/index.html - Overview section is identical to text on the possible source site. Can't tell which material was copied from which. Most material was added as a block at this diff. Major difference is that possible source still has 06-07 attendance, while the article has 07-08 attendance now. Article did not have this attendance data when material was first added.Doug.(talk • contribs) 23:00, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Green tickY Thanks for your very complete listing! (Makes things so much easier on this end!) I'm convinced that this is a reverse infringement. My major reasons: the lead text is also in that external source, but it was added to our article at creation, several years before the bulk text you note ([18]); this alteration was made almost a month later, changing the article to be closer to what is published in that source. I'm fairly confident that this text was copied from Wikipedia some time after June 2007. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:30, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • ITunes version history (history · last edit) from [19]. Nomination completed by DumbBOT (talk) 00:21, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:37, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Copyright_problems/2009_October_31&oldid=1136460921"