This page has been removed from search engines' indexes.
All contributors with no history of copyright problems are welcome to contribute to clean up. Contributors who are the subject of a contributor copyright investigation are among contributors with a history of copyright problems and so are not welcome to directly evaluate their own or others' copyright violations in CCIs. They are welcome to assist with rewriting any problems identified.
If contributors have been shown to have a history of extensive copyright violation, it may be assumed without further evidence that all of their major contributions are copyright violations, and they may be removed indiscriminately in accordance with Wikipedia:Copyright violations. Contributors who are the subject of a contributor copyright investigation are among contributors who have been shown to have a history of extensive copyright violation and so all of the below listed contributions may be removed indiscriminately. However, to avoid collateral damage, efforts should be made when possible to verify infringement before removal.
When every section is completed, please alter the listing for this CCI at Wikipedia:CCI#Open_investigations to include the tag "completed=yes". This will alert a clerk that the listing needs to be archived.
((CCI-open|Contributor name|Day Month Year|completed=yes))
- Examine the article or the diffs linked below.
- If the contributor has added creative content, either evaluate it carefully for copyright concerns or remove it.
- Evaluating for copyright concerns may include checking the listed sources, spot-checking using google, google books and other search engines and looking for major differences in writing style. The background may give some indication of the kinds of copyright concerns that have been previously detected. For older text, mirrors of Wikipedia content may make determining which came first difficult. It may be helpful to look for significant changes to the text after it was entered. Searching for the earlier form of text can help eliminate later mirrors. If you cannot determine which came first, text should be removed presumptively, since there is an established history of copying with the editor in question.
- If you remove text presumptively, place
((subst:CCI|name=Contributor name))
on the article's talk page.
- If you specifically locate infringement and remove it (or revert to a previous clean version), place
((subst:cclean))
on the article's talk page. The url parameter may be optionally used to indicate source.
- If there is insufficient creative content on the page for it to survive the removal of the text or it is impossible to extricate from subsequent improvements, replace it with
((subst:copyvio))
, linking to the investigation subpage in the url parameter. List the article as instructed at the copyright problems board, but you do not need to notify the contributor. Your note on the CCI investigation page serves that purpose.
- To tag an article created by the contributor for presumptive deletion, place
((subst:copyvio|url=see talk))
on the article's face and ((subst:CCId|name=Contributor name))
on the article's talk page. List the article as instructed at the copyright problems board, but you do not need to notify the contributor.
- After examining an article:
- replace the diffs after the colon on the listing with indication of whether a problem was found (add ((y))) or not (add ((n))). If the article is blanked and may be deleted, please indicate as much after the ((y)). The ((?)) template may be used for articles where you were unable to determine whether or not a violation occurred, but are prepared to remove the article from consideration – either because the material is no longer present in the article, or it is adequately paraphrased so as to no longer be a violation (please specify which).
- Follow with your username and the time to indicate to others that the article has been evaluated and appropriately addressed. This is automatically generated by four tildes (~~~~)
- If a section is complete, consider collapsing it by placing ((collapse top)) and ((collapse bottom)) beneath the section header and after the final listing.
Subpages:
checked
|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
|
- Loser (novel) (2 edits): Y removed but large copyvio, requested revdel. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 20:24, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Karl Theodor Ferdinand Grün (1 edit): N attributed merge of content they didn't create. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 20:29, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- The Oregon Desert (1 edit): N attributed merge of content they didn't create; later reverted. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 20:29, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Cleopatra (crater) (1 edit): N attributed merge of content they didn't create. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 20:29, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Parish of St. Brendan and of St. Ann (2 edits): N attributed merge of content they didn't create. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 20:29, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Mary Ward (nun) (2 edits): N Any potential copyvio is content from the 1912 Catholic Encyclopedia, which is in the public domain. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 21:34, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- John Dolan (writer) (1 edit): N Checked --Zupotachyon (talk) 08:16, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Sisters of the Infant Jesus (1 edit): Y Was still present in the article when I checked it, so I've nuked the copyvio sections, which date back to 2015. Copyvio revdel template placed. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 21:28, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Charlotte Harbor (estuary) (1 edit): N Attributed merge of content they did not create. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 21:38, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Our Lady of Pellevoisin (1 edit): N Attributed merge of content they did not create. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 21:45, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Due South characters (5 edits): Y Many attributed merges of content they did not create, but one merge (from Due South) was unattributed. I've attributed it now. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 23:32, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Big Coppitt Key (1 edit): N Attributed merge of content they did not create. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 23:36, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- The Lifted Brow (1 edit): Y Some content merged into the article was unattributed content the author did not create. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 23:48, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Charles W. Sexton (1 edit): N Attributed merge of content they did not create. The text of the citation is in the Public Domain as a U.S. government work. Find a Grave seems to be copying from Wikipedia without attribution, rather than the other way around. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 00:01, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Society for Art History in Switzerland (1 edit): N Attributed merge of content the CCI subject did not create. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 18:59, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Order of Saint Lazarus (statuted 1910) (9 edits): Y Improperly attributed merge from Order of Lazarus. There is some reverse copyvio of the page, such as from the Constitutional Grand Priory of Carpthia, but I don't see copyvio text itself except for interwiki copying. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 07:07, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Henry Clay (steamboat) (2 edits): N Properly attributed merge. Sarah Sails was created in 2020, so similarities can't be copyvio on Wikipedia's end. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 03:37, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Canoness (2 edits): Y lot of information copied from the 1908 Catholic Encyclopedia, which is in the public domain, but some comes from a non-PD source. I've removed copyvio material and flagged for revdel. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 05:44, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Charles Bosseron Chambers (3 edits): Y Very mild copyvio (about two sentences) and an issue with WP:COPYLINK. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 19:34, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Norman Lowther Edson (1 edit): N Attributed merge of content the editor did not write. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 20:48, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
|
Pages 21 through 40
[edit]
Checked
|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
|
- Katharine Drexel (3 edits): Y Copy-paste of copyrighted internet content. Copyvio tag applied and article added to WP:Copyright Problems. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 02:27, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Rhetorical operations (1 edit): N Properly attributed merge of content that the editor did not write. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 04:56, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- The Barry Building (1 edit): N Properly attributed merge of content that the editor did not write. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 04:57, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Cranbrook, Kent (1 edit): N Properly attributed merge of content that the editor did not write. Some external sites are using Wikipedia content without proper attribution, but this does not pose a copyright problem for our article. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 05:03, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Frank Curto (1 edit): Y There was verbatim copying from an obituary published in an academic journal in 1971. I've rephrased the content to no longer be copyvio and I've requested revdel. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 05:16, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Forest restoration (1 edit): N Properly attributed merge of content that the editor did not write. There's an undergrad slideshare that steals verbatim from this, but this does not pose a copyright problem for our article. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 05:20, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- James O'Neill (actor, born 1847) (4 edits): Y. Listed at the copyright problems board, since a large amount of the article is verbatim copyvio from the NY Times. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 01:54, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Removed copyvio from article Signed,The4lines |||| (Talk) (Contributions) 00:31, 10 August 2022 (UTC).[reply]
- Mo Ling (1 edit): Y Copyright violation by copy-pasting online sources that predate the edit. Created an entry on WP:Copyright problems. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 23:05, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Nicholas J. Clayton (5 edits): Y Copyright violation by copy-pasting online and offline sources. Created an entry on WP:Copyright problems. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 02:48, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- First United Methodist Church of Chicago (1 edit): N Attributed merge of content they did not write. There is some reverse copyvio from things like Flickr and a railfan blog, but those entries appear to post-date the merge. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:29, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- The Orchard (company) (1 edit): N Attributed merge of content they did not write. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 23:20, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Sulby Abbey (1 edit): Y There was some mild copy-pasting from non-PD sources, though much of the content is copy-pasted from a PD source. Copyvio tag applied. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 23:14, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- College of Mount Saint Vincent (5 edits): Y Extensive copyvio that taints more or less every subsequent revision to the page up and through the current version. Listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2022 September 19. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:11, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Nashua, New Hampshire (1 edit): ? There may have been mild copyvio in the edit, which I have rephrased. I don't think that this needs a revdel. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 06:28, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Perfectae Caritatis (2 edits): Y Verbatim quoting from copyrighted Vatican II document. I have reverted to before the copyvio as a remedial measure and applied a ((copyvio-revdel)) tag. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 03:35, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- French school of spirituality (2 edits):Y Verbatim copying from copyrighted files that are available online. I'm unable to gain access to some of the print sources, so I've posted this at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2022 September 18 for further review. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:09, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- First-person narrative (2 edits): Y Copy-paste from two websites (one of which is now archived). Possible copy-paste from a source of unclear origin that may be public domain in the United States if it was published in Iran as the citation noted. Listed on copyproblems. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:58, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Christianized sites (1 edit): Y Improperly attributed merge that failed to link to the source. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 22:17, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Margaret Sinclair (nun) (1 edit): Y Copyright violations added by user; article required quite a bit of remediation from other editors also adding copyvios. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 18:40, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Rögnvald Kali Kolsson (1 edit): Y Copyright violations added by user from the text of an entry in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Listed on copyproblems. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 04:11, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
|
Pages 41 through 60
[edit]Pages 61 through 80
[edit]Pages 81 through 100
[edit]Pages 101 through 120
[edit]Pages 121 through 140
[edit]Pages 141 through 160
[edit]Pages 161 through 180
[edit]Pages 181 through 200
[edit]Pages 201 through 220
[edit]Pages 221 through 240
[edit]Pages 241 through 260
[edit]Pages 261 through 280
[edit]Pages 281 through 300
[edit]Pages 301 through 320
[edit]Pages 321 through 340
[edit]Pages 341 through 360
[edit]Pages 361 through 380
[edit]Pages 381 through 400
[edit]Pages 401 through 420
[edit]Pages 421 through 440
[edit]Pages 441 through 460
[edit]Pages 461 through 480
[edit]Pages 481 through 500
[edit]Pages 501 through 520
[edit]Pages 521 through 540
[edit]Pages 541 through 560
[edit]Pages 561 through 580
[edit]Pages 581 through 600
[edit]Pages 601 through 620
[edit]Pages 621 through 640
[edit]Pages 641 through 660
[edit]Pages 661 through 680
[edit]Pages 681 through 700
[edit]Pages 701 through 720
[edit]Pages 721 through 740
[edit]Pages 741 through 760
[edit]Pages 761 through 780
[edit]Pages 781 through 800
[edit]Pages 801 through 820
[edit]Pages 821 through 840
[edit]Pages 841 through 860
[edit]Pages 861 through 880
[edit]Pages 881 through 900
[edit]Pages 901 through 920
[edit]Pages 921 through 940
[edit]Pages 941 through 960
[edit]Pages 961 through 980
[edit]Pages 981 through 1000
[edit]This report generated by ContributionSurveyor.java at 2021-02-15T20:46:21.443903Z. Survey URL: http://wikipediatools.appspot.com/contributionsurveyor.jsp?mode=on&user=Mannanan51&wiki=en.wikipedia.org&noreverts=1&nodrafts=1&earliest=&latest=&bytefloor=150