Cannabis Indica

thcscience_admin

7 July 2012[edit]

Suspected copyright violations (CorenSearchBot reports)

SCV for 2012-07-07 Edit

2012-07-07 (Suspected copyright violations)[edit]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. Article contained the text of the poem it's discussing, which seems to be copyrighted. Hut 8.5 11:55, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Infringing article has been deleted. Hut 8.5 10:35, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Infringing article has been deleted. Hut 8.5 10:35, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Infringing article has been deleted. Hut 8.5 10:35, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Cut-and-paste move, which the creator reverted once the article was tagged. I have now moved the page properly. Hut 8.5 12:22, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Common content is just a list of the locations of churches, it doesn't meet the threshold of originality for copyright protection. Hut 8.5 14:26, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Cut-and-paste move, no action needed since same editor wrote both pages. Hut 8.5 19:27, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. Hut 8.5 10:35, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Copyright investigations (manual article tagging)[edit]
Much verbatim material and foundational. Needs a complete rewrite. Blanked with {{copyvio}}. Relisting from Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2012 May 23}} Voceditenore (talk) 15:01, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment According to the talk page, there is close paraphrase from this book. However the degree of "closeness" in my view is not severe and some of it I'd argue is OK. If there is any verbatim copying, it is almost surely only parts of sentences and scattered about in a few places. I'm not going to mark this closed, but I think it should be given very low priority given the backlog here. Possibly re-list? Voceditenore (talk) 07:54, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • CommentI concur, The ideal reviewer may be someone with GA credits, and looking for another. This article is close to GA, and a nice clean rewrite of the relevant section would clear up this entry, and earn credit for assistance in a GA.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 16:53, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • There seems to have been some general close paraphrase of several sources. Probably none of it rose to the level of "horrible", but cumulatively it was all a bit sloppy. Revised. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:33, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. Not by me, but by MRG, who, even on break from CP, still does more than most --SPhilbrick(Talk) 22:37, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. --Theleftorium (talk) 13:03, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyright_problems/2012_July_7

Leave a Reply