Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2009 January 16

16 January 2009

Siddhatek (history · last edit) from [1]. It seems the original violators tried to cover up their actions by reversing the paragraphs and removing just some lines from the original source so it wouldn't look like a copy and paste job. 62.219.97.43 (talk) 12:10, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Archive search confirms their prior publication, [2]. Contributor not notified. Remedying and blanking article. Relisting this under today to allow time for contributor to respond. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:57, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Y No response. Article deleted. New stub placed. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:44, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Reculver Castle (history · last edit) from [3]. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:02, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Y Copyvio unaddressed. New version in place. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:55, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Torksey Castle (history · last edit) from [4]. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:07, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Y Cleaned. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:29, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Annesley Castle (history · last edit) from [5]. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:09, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Incompatible license (see [6].) Copyvio unaddressed. Deleted to allow future creation clean. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:31, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Greasley Castle (history · last edit) from [7]. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:10, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Incompatible license (see [8].) Copyvio unaddressed. Deleted to allow future creation clean. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:44, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Haltwhistle Castle (history · last edit) from http://www.castleuk.net/castle_lists_north/86/haltwhistletower.htm http://www.castleuk.net/castle_lists_north/86/haltwhistlebastle2.htm and other subpages. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:14, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mulgrave Castle (history · last edit) from [9] [10]. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:18, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Y All the way back. Replaced with clean. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:51, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Lythe Castle (history · last edit) from [11]. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:20, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wakefield Castle (history · last edit) from [12]. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:22, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Gainsborough Castle (history · last edit) from [13]. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:24, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Laxton Castle (history · last edit) from [14]. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:25, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Y New version placed sans copyvio. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:17, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Melbourne Castle (history · last edit) from [15]. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:26, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Y New version placed sans copyvio. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 21:14, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mackworth Castle (history · last edit) from [16]. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:27, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Y New version placed sans copyvio. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:39, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Dalton-le-Dale (history · last edit) from [17]. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:52, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Y Excised. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:45, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Dalton Tower (history · last edit) from [18]. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:55, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hardwick Hall Country Park (history · last edit) from http://www.durham.gov.uk/durhamcc/usp.nsf/pws/Parks+and+Picnic+Areas+-+Archaeology+Hardwick+Park. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:08, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Y After duplicated material was removed, only a few fragments remained. New article placed. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 01:13, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Budby (history · last edit) from [19]. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:51, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Infringement goes all the way back. I also have concerns about some of the text I have not identified (which constitutes a couple of sentences), given the history of this contributor and comparison of the tone of contributions elsewhere (cf. this comment). --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:56, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We're in the Music Biz (history · last edit) cut and paste from ""Pop CD of the week" review in the "Album cover" section of the article. Soundvisions1 (talk) 13:30, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- This problem can be easily fixed by reverting back to an earlier copyvio free version [20]. Duffbeerforme (talk) 12:25, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is my understanding that simply rolling back a copy vio, or changing one or two words, does not fix the issue. These articles are already included in the parent article about the band anyway and thus far all these stand alone articles on their releases add are track listings. Per your comment on the talk page that the copyvio is "silly" and you will remove the tags is understandable considering you are a fan, however removing notablity tags will do nothing to expand on the article which has been, overall, "We're In the Music Biz is the third album by Robots in Disguise" since the article creation January 29, 2008. Soundvisions1 (talk) 12:52, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For the record I am not a fan. I said silly based on the extreme measure taken. The tag you used effectively stopped edditng the article till an admin revewied it. Far too extreme for such a short copyvio in just one section of the article. Wikipedia:Copyright problems suggests that "If there is a clean revision in the page history, revert to it." There was such a version. You were right in warning the editor but a simple reversion was all that was needed on the article. Duffbeerforme (talk) 14:05, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
additional comment. My comment that I would do the same included (as with both previous articles) adding reviews, ie coverage in independant sources. Duffbeerforme (talk) 14:23, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Y Cleaned. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:25, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]