Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2010 November 30

< Wikipedia:Copyright problems

30 November 2010

edit
Resolved

SCV for 2010-11-30 Edit

edit
Copyright investigations (manual article tagging)
edit
  • Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (history · last edit) from [1] and [2] and who knows whether there are others. EdChem (talk) 11:03, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I was looking for information on this disease (hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, also called HLH) and noticed similarities to other sources I had read. For example, in the causes section, it states, without reference:
    Hyperproduction of cytokines, including interferon-γ and tumor necrosis factor-α, by EBV-infected T lymphocytes may play a role in the pathogenesis of HLH. EBV-associated HLH may mimic T-cell lymphoma and is treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy. In contrast, hemophagocytic syndromes associated with nonviral pathogens often respond to treatment of the underlying infection.
    Quoting from the abstract of the paper at http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol6no6/fisman.htm with commonalities highlighted in bold:
    Hyperproduction of cytokines, including interferon-γ and tumor necrosis factor-α, by EBV-infected T lymphocytes may play a role in the pathogenesis of HLH. EBV-associated HLH may mimic T-cell lymphoma and is treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy, while hemophagocytic syndromes associated with nonviral pathogens often respond to treatment of the underlying infection.
    This source is reference 1 of the article, but is only cited by the lede, whilst this section on causes is unreferenced.
    I also noted in the characteristics and diagnosis section, which states:
    Defects in perforin-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity may not only allow the persistence of intracellular pathogens and immune stimulation, but may also impair lymphocyte homeostasis, thereby preventing apoptosis of T lymphocytes after the immune stimulus has been eliminated.
    A google search for this sentence shows a perfect match to a book chapter by Gans, the start of which can be seen here. This section of the article has only one reference, at the very end, and that reference is not Gans.
    I can understand that the writing on a technical topic like a rare and potentially fatal disease, but that doesn't make unattributed quotations and copyright violations acceptable, so I presume this is the kind of problem that this corner of WP is experienced with. EdChem (talk) 11:03, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Follow-up: The second quote was added in this diff from user:Arc2016 on June 24, 2010... that was the sole edit of this account. Am I supposed to notify him / her? Also, I have not tagged the article - wasn't sure with what. Sorry. EdChem (talk) 11:12, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Further... the original version of the article by User:Nothingnesswithoutend in 2006 appears to have been the entire abstract of the Fisman paper, plus some additional material. The Fisman material has been divided as the article evolved - some remains in the lede, some in #Causes, etc. The user who posted it has had one edit in 2010 (it was in November). Hopefully this is useful in deciding who if anyone to notify. EdChem (talk) 11:22, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I have posted notes to editors Arcadian, Arc2016, and Nothingnesswithoutend - Arcadian as s/he has regularly edited the article, and the others as they are mentioned above. In the absence of any response, I am also going to guess as to what tag to add to the article (beyond a talk page post). EdChem (talk) 09:18, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. This one has been de facto closed by User:Dbachmann with the puzzling edit summary "TOC" (on 12/1). I've verified that no rewrite had been proposed prior to the removal of the template, so I guess this one is done. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:15, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Criticism of Twelver Shi'ism (history · last edit) from . Humaliwalay (talk) 06:04, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Original websites were the Copyrights needed to be obtained from are :
    • Humaliwalay (talk) 06:04, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • could the tag that is blocking the article be removed. do not believ this humaliwalay. he is a serial sectarian instigator on wiki as his history shows. there is no copyvio or watever. these are all lies just see the article and you will find that he is big liar.Suenahrme (talk) 06:21, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • The hatred in your statement itself is indicative how much sectarian you are and you are pointing fingers towards me. I am not even frequent contributor to Wikipedia since last few weeks forget about editing this article. If you find no violations then please provide us with the copyright permissions from the owners. Thanks and hope to find your comments henceforth in good faith.
        • If you do not stop abusing me I will be forced by the circumstances created by you to report your behavior to one of the editors. Wikipedia:Assume good faith please. - Humaliwalay (talk) 07:07, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
          • i am astonished how much an instigator you are. i will not provide any copyright permission because none is needed. you are lying there is no copyvio. you put this tag on your own without consulting. you also lie because you have been very busy in wikipedia even in past days spreading your sectarian instigation on other articles. to the people wqho judge this all i ask is that you look at humaliwalays contribution history and see him for his lie. and look at the articlle he tagged on criticism and see his unfounded response because article is good and not violating anything he accuses.Suenahrme (talk) 07:37, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think that the copyvio tag blocking the page is unhelpful, especially when the article is currently being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticism of Twelver Shi'ism amid claims that it is patent nonsense, POV, soapbox etc. The dispute seems to follow on from the recent Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticism of Sunni Islam on an article which also faced copyvio issues[3] --Rumping (talk) 11:31, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • Dear User Rumping, the article Criticism of Sunni Islam was deleted long time back, so this issue is not following that one. Yes but the copyvio issue existed in both article I do agree with you on that. The problem here is that the article is is in complete bad faith and cannot be appreciated and taken as an encyclopedic material. Thanks. - Humaliwalay (talk) 11:42, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • Infact it was me who put afd request for the article and later fouund that its copyvio also. Apart from sources mentioned above article copies from following sources also:
          1. The position of women from the viewpoint of Imam Khomeini (may Allah grant him peace), By Ruhollah Khomeini, Alhoda UK, 2001 - Social Science - 299 pages
          2. Statements about al-Jafr al-Jami‘ and the Book of Fatima (a.s.)
          --Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haidertcs
          • To whoever is judging this I would like to say that humaliwalay says he first put the article for afd. But this is clearly incorrect. The person who put it up for afd was really faizhaider at 9:36 29th November 2010 right after my edit. Faizhaider also added “ad csd tmplt” to description edit. So no it was not humaliwalay who add afd unless he is faizhaider.
          Humaliwalay also says I copyvio from “The position of women from the viewpoint of Imam Khomeini (may Allah grant him peace), By Ruhollah Khomeini, Alhoda UK, 2001 - Social Science - 299 pages and also Statements about al-Jafr al-Jami‘ and the Book of Fatima (a.s.)”. weell all I can say is that I have given the internet link to these pages and have also quoted what these links state in the references section of the wiki article. But if we are not allowed to quote whaty they say in the references section then I am more than happy to remove the quotes and only leave the internet link to these quotes. This fine by me. The other 4 websites he gives I am not sure what he is proving but I already say in Afd discussion what I used the www.ahlebayt.com website for and its not copyvio anyway. I do disagree but I am not going to respond to his “complete bad faith and cannot be appreciated and taken as an encyclopedic material” in this area of wiki. I leave this to the judges in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticism of Twelver Shi'ism section of wiki.Suenahrme (talk) 03:05, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • (resetting indent) The template was removed from the article out of process, but the content is considerably changed since then. Are there copyright concerns with the current version? If so, could you please specify what sources and provide an example? Links such as http://www.northill.demon.co.uk/ are of limited value, since no content was copied from that page and since I cannot guess which subpage of that domain may be the source of the content. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:34, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article has been relisted so here are my comments:
The article has changed lot (I didn't get time to review it but previous cpyvio material seems to be have removed) and imo we can have article stay for now as it is getting improved each passing day (Thanks to efforts of Matthew). I'll try to contrubute to the article but as of now I have other priorities (both on WP & real life). --Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haidertcs 12:26, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Copyright_problems/2010_November_30&oldid=401607790"