Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Archive/Declined 2014-2018

< Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations‎ | Archive


2014

edit

 Allan1954

Example from Herbert1962:

IPs with closely similar edits include 93.45.134.97, 93.45.115.76, 93.50.192.173, 93.45.109.43, 93.45.142.246, 93.41.234.191, 93.41.228.218, 93.45.126.243 and 93.47.133.109. Incidentally, all geolocate to the same country, most to the city of Rome, as does the IP who posted on my talk today, 213.203.130.116. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:42, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Marcel Bischofberger

 Eke3e3

I went through and deleted the uploads (around 8-10). I don't think any more action is needed. If the uploading continues after the warning, please follow up at WP:ANI for a block until they can confirm they understand the policy etc. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:41, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 WR227

All of this user's uploads appear to be properly tagged logos. It's permissible to upload an organization's logo for use in the article. What is the problem you are seeing here? Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:43, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • There is only one organizational logo here which is still tagged for deletion as unlicensed (only under a claim of fair use per Wikipedia:Non-free content). Couple of the non-free images were deleted as per different deletion cafeterias. I think user will try do repeat the same process again. A.Minkowiski _Lets t@lk 17:36, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • That image wasn't orphaned anymore, so I removed the tag. This page is for a systematic review of a user's contributions where there may be multiple copyright violations. In this case, it appears that whatever images were a problem have been deleted, and the problems were not terribly grave. (If an uploader were, for example, lying about image sources, that is an indicator of a major problem -- but just some unused or duplicate non-free logos? That's a normal byproduct of editing, and they will be deleted in due course.) I'm not sure what action you hope will be taken as a result of this report. I guess I don't see how any investigation is necessary. Did you bring this here thinking that the user should be blocked? I don't think that's warranted either. Just leave a friendly message on their talkpage about any issues you see, and how they could be avoided in the future. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:02, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • Not reported for block purpose, only for some sort of admin action. User were violating policies after suggestions of different editors. Its upto you sir, and it is good if you have left a friendly message there. Thank you A.Minkowiski _Lets t@lk 18:09, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Peaceful5

  Declined, the only remaining image that had an issue I just deleted (was the one you tagged). He last uploaded anything in 2009 so there shouldn't be any future issues. Wizardman 21:02, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Raimundo Pastor

  • Hi, User:Beland. :) I'm seeing a fair amount of copying within Wikipedia, which makes sense because he doesn't not seem confident in English. I have not yet found copying from external sources with a spotcheck of his articles. I notice that you recently flagged an article he worked on as a copy-paste, but you don't seem to have identified the source. Can you please identify the original or originals? It would help in evaluating this request. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:27, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
From the looks of it, most of his significant creations are (attempted) translations from the Spanish Wikipedia, generally of articles he originally wrote there. It's clear that that's his first language. I'm not seeing any evidence of copyvio from external sources, just someone who should be a bit clearer in noting that he's moving articles from one wiki to another.   Declined Wizardman 21:18, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Ryanevison

Looks like there's plenty more... 121.98.124.75 (talk) 01:30, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I indef-blocked the user and reverted anything less (I checked two more articles and found two more copyvios, so after that I just rv'd all his edits. No further action needed here. Wizardman 02:27, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2015

edit

 StewieBaby05

  • StewieBaby05 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
  • Check requested by Elizium23 (talk)
  • TV episode articles split and copy-pasted without attribution, see WP:Copying within Wikipedia. Discussion is being held at WT:TV#StewieBaby05. Elizium23 (talk) 20:53, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just to clarify, StewieBaby05 has split literally hundreds of TV episode lists into multiple season articles without any attempt to provide attribution in accordance with WP:PROPERSPLIT oder WP:CWW. Multiple requests to comply have been made on his talk page since early 2013 but all have effectively been ignored. --AussieLegend (✉) 08:24, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Confirmed; StewieBaby05 has been warned about the copyright problems at least seven times in the last couple years, and seems to have ignored the warning in every case. The lack of attributions should be easy, though very time-consuming, to fix. Unless we get some assurance that he's going to comply with the licensing requirements, he probably shouldn't be allowed to continue editing. I will reach out to him one last time on his user talk page. —Psychonaut (talk) 09:33, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm prepared to go hardline on this one, Psychonaut. If he continues editing without responding, please let me know. :/ I believe this is one of those cases where we should require assistance with cleanup, as per Wikipedia:Copyright violations, but at the very least do not believe that he can be permitted to continue editing without proving his ability to understand and his willingness to comply. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:57, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • Most of the articles created by StewieBaby05 have been unnecessary splits from television episode lists and the best cleanup is really just re-merging the lists. However, there are quite a few articles that still require attribution, even if it's just adding templates on talk pages. StewieBaby05 has apologised for recent edits,[12][13][14] but history shows that it's best not to take those apologies at face value. He apologised to me in August,[15] but since then he's gone back to splitting lists again. --AussieLegend (✉) 12:50, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • The user has indicated that he understands the problem and is willing to help clean up. This will probably be most easily accomplished with the help of the contribution surveyor. I don't have time to open a CCI subpage now; if anyone else has time feel free to do so. —Psychonaut (talk) 16:19, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is the attribution the only issue or is there other copyright issues? If the former, I'm leaning towards declining, since while it does need to be fixed, I wouldn't go out of my way to add it on top of the forever-increasing backlog. Wizardman 15:56, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A recent look at his edits shows that he's undoing the most significant edits he made that had those attribution problems, so declining this. Wizardman 04:14, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Toufeeque

I went through and deleted the files he uploaded and what he created as copyvio, as well as nuked most of his contributions (the infobox additions are fine, that was about it). He only had ~15 significant articles after I nuked the created ones, so it is now cleaned and he's been blocked. Wizardman 04:22, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Grickles

I think all edits from this user need to be checked. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 00:23, 25 January 2015 (UTC) Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 00:23, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Block requested at ANI. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 00:44, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I nuked his major edits; thankfully he only had about 20 and half of them had already been rv'd. I'll double-check tomorrow to make sure I missed nothing and will archive if that's the case. Also he's blocked. Wizardman 04:21, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect, thank you. I was hoping we could get away without actually opening this one. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:22, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 LUKERAVI

 Nofoto

The contribution surveyor is down again, so I can't easily check how large this might be and whether it needs to be formally opened - perhaps not? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:18, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like he's only worked on about 10 articles; I'll do a sweep of them when time permits, shouldn't need to be formally opened. Wizardman 15:02, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sweep is done, took out any copyvios that remained. Wizardman 16:39, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 MightyPepper

  • Note that adding things like "It may be noted that", followed by a sentence pasted from the source, is not paraphrasing. Modifying a few words while maintaining the same structure is still considered too close. Please see This Diff for example, of me paraphrasing the paragraph linked above. Read the source material, understand it, then write the text in your own words. Pasting the text in and then modifying it is not usually sufficient. CrowCaw 20:16, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Eyesonchrist

 Jimmywagtail01

Any remaining additions I've went ahead and reverted, so this can be declined. Ideally he won't have to be revisited. Wizardman 22:02, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 The Northaptonshire pins

User only has edits to about 20 articles, so this too may not need to be formally opened. IP edits to the same pages may also need checking, I suspect. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:25, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MER-C 08:34, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Awbuckley

  • Awbuckley (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
  • Check requested by Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk)
  • There are four copyvio discussions on the user's talk page, including one I dealt with today, and this seems to be a copy of a book jacket blurb[25] (but was rewritten from scratch in 2006 by another editor). The user has not been active since 2011, and the suspected infringements uncovered so far occurred in 2005–2006. I have no doubt that this is a typical case of a misunderstanding of copyright law as a habit, so it will probably be helpful to trawl through this editor's contribution history for other such copy-pastes. Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 12:40, 2 April 2015 (UTC) Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 12:40, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The user only had a handful of major edits, and all but one had been reverted long ago; I blanked the one edit that wasn't. Can be safely declined as done. Wizardman 15:06, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Tomertlhomes

Gsingh (talk) 21:03, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Bablu Baghel

This report generated by Contribution Surveyor at 2015-06-17T12:00:27+00:00 in 0.05 sec.

 Wahrheitssucher

 Dortega94

Dortega94 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

This report generated by Contribution Surveyor at 2015-05-22T01:14:05+00:00 in 0.08 sec.

2016

edit

 Ahiranvill

Articles 1 through 9

Ahiranvill (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

This report covers contributions to 9 articles from timestamp 2014-12-21 14:44:04 UTC to timestamp 2015-12-21 06:26:25 UTC.

This report generated by Contribution Surveyor at 2015-12-22T15:21:49+00:00 in 0.04 sec.

 Mbhskid520

 Lee788

I have deleted all the photos and will monitor for further violations. Spot checks don't reveal any prose copy vio. — Diannaa (talk) 16:33, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, @Diannaa:, but File:Har Cheong Gai.JPG is actually fine - the license of the given origin site is CC-BY-SA 2.5 and searching for the image on Google didn't indicate it comes from somewhere else.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:40, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've restored that file. Good catch. — Diannaa (talk) 16:48, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Centre1752


 Veltech Digital Army

  • Veltech Digital Army (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
  • Check requested by Nil Einne (talk)
  • I came across this editor while investigation the contributions of User:Harishmfs. Harishmfs modus operandi appears to be to create articles which are basically complete copyvios and include a reference to the institution they are allegedly studying at including a long list of names of authors of this reference. Most of these reference are useless, simply links to the main page of the institution. The one I came across that wasn't was a newsletter which frankly given the history here could very well be a copyvio itself. I think i've mostly finished with Harishmfs except for article which they didn't create which is where this crossover happened. It looks a lot like Veltech Digital Army did the same thing before they were blocked fro spam. (Harishmfs's userpage mentions them being part of this Veltech Digital Army. I guess Veltech Digital Army is Veltech Spammer Army although this army probably isn't very big.) I may get round to it myself but at the moment, I'm getting a bit tired of looking at copyvios which were probably only created for spam. I could probably just get an admin to speedy all 3 articles, but 2 have been turned in to redirects. While the edit summary does suggest anything was copied someone should make sure. Nil Einne (talk) 14:03, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2017

edit

 Iadmc

 Triana2

and so on. The editor has created many more articles similar to the ones posted above. Triana2 has had several warnings on her talk-page, as well as suggestions for how to better proceed with her well-intentioned goal. I apologize if ANI would have been the better place to start with this. Lizzius (talk) 15:09, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the report. All of the user's contributions have been cleaned up, so there is no need to open an investigation now. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:20, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Yungtravie

  • Yungtravie (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
  • Check requested by Chubbles (talk)
  • I've come across this user a number of times because I have the page Sanchez (singer) on my watchlist and the user has regularly edited the page for several years. This page has been edited hundreds of times by this editor, as well as, using the same editing patterns, a series of closely-linked IPs, and users named "Youngtravie" (the page creator), "Kidtravie", and "Traviekellman"; these might be SOCKs or just older accounts. Years ago, Kidtravie received three warnings for copyright violations, two from me, on the Sanchez page, and I once reverted Traviekellman for copyright problems as well. I removed all copyrighted content from Sanchez (singer) at one point, so it doesn't need to be deleted or anything. These are years-old, of course, but I just took a look at Yungtravie's talk page, and it includes no fewer than seven warnings from other editors about addition of copyrighted material. ([33], [34], [35], [36], [37], [38], [39]). I'm not really sure I'm in the right venue - I'm not asking for any particular content to be removed, as I have not definitively identified a pattern of copyright violation that went unnoticed, just that some oversight/instruction/whatever-measures-necessary be given to this editor as an apparent serial infringer. Chubbles (talk) 01:08, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I just did this User_talk:Yungtravie#Block_until_you_acknowledge_copyright_policy. I hope that this puts an end to the problem. It looks like all past issues have been cleaned up, but the user needs to indicate that he isn't going to keep creating additional issues. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:50, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Mrbrak

Just went through all his uploads and nominated for deletion where appropriate. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:46, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Yeh5863

All contributions have already been deleted. Calliopejen1 (talk) 03:20, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Thutaa

I checked all remaining images and they look good. I went through all text contributions and found a tiny bit of copying (now removed) but not much. Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:47, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Grochim

There was extended discussion between the user and Moonriddengirl in 2009, where as far as I can see the user was not able to grasp the concept of copyright. All contribs now definitely need to be checked. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:21, 18 February 2017 (UTC) Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:21, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 NerdChloe

 BrendelSignature

I checked some of his other contributions and found no evidence of widespread copying. If you find further evidence, please return to WP:CCI; otherwise we're done for now. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:42, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Angiele Adkins

 Abrahami

The editor's comment on his/her talk-page ("The first article was sourced with the link to the source so I don't think this is copyright violation. For the second, I thought I mentioned the source too.") seems to indicate a lack of understanding of our copyright policy. The editor has more than 25,000 edits on fr.wp, so let's hope those don't need to be looked at too. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:35, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I checked the contributions smaller than those listed below but the remaining ones should be checked. Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:10, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 89.91.144.191

Extended content

2018

edit

 FLACOPAILO

 Abdelkader123456

  • Abdelkader123456 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
  • Check requested by MT TrainTalk
  • Editor has been involved in rapid creation of articles on diplomatic relations between nations, most of them containing copypasted materials in varying degrees. Eg: 1, 2, 3, 4 and several others. MT TrainTalk 13:23, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've spot checked more of this editor's articles, and they were riddled with copyright violations. I have deleted all of the articles they created, and reverted their changes to pre-existing articles. I suspect that this was also a sockpuppet account - there have been one or two long-running sockmasters who've been engaged mainly in rapidly creating articles on bilateral country relations, including obscure combinations of countries, who have poor English language skills outside of the material they cut and paste from elsewhere, and this is entirely consistent with their behaviour. Nick-D (talk) 05:24, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Closing as resolved. MER-C 19:21, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Gkmand127

 DrChrissy

Reply I would like to state that I have not deliberately violated copyright and I have been editing in good faith. I have made all my edits in the belief that my paraphrasing is not too close. I may have inadvertently too closely paraphrased on occasion, and for this, I apologise. I am more than happy to re-phrase material which is in violation (I have already done this today at Theory of mind in animals). I am a scientist in real life and have written over 60 peer-reviewed articles. I am therefore used to paraphrasing what other scientists have written, but I have never before been accused of copyright violation. Sometimes, in scientific writing, it is impossible to state material in a different way without making this inaccurate. I have therefore sometimes copied and pasted a sentence or portion, believing that this was allowed. DrChrissy (talk) 17:21, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikkimaria: provides 4 diffs of my allegedly violating copyright.

Diff #1 is paraphrasing. I am happy for someone to assess this and if the paraphrasing is considered to be "too close", I will edit this. Diff #2 appears to be repeating facts, rather than using someone else's creativity. I will edit if required to. Diff #3 is paraphrasing. I am happy for someone to assess this and if the paraphrasing is considered to be "too close", I will edit this. Diff #4 was made on February 23rd 2016. The text is no longer recognisable in the form the complainant accuses me of in copyright violation. It was probably a temporary save which I went back to and paraphrased later.

DrChrissy (talk) 22:42, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have time to deeply evaluate, but I will note that a quick review of edit history disclosed the following concerns: [42]. There may be follow-up to that note there; I have not tagged any of the article themselves. I have committed to review another potential CCI today and have limited time. :/ --Moonriddengirl (talk) 00:33, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Sdjones

Many of their contributions seem to be blatant plagiarism.

  • [43]: "a civilian computer expert..." from [44]
  • [45]: "alleged to have paid bribes..." from [46]
  • [47]: "...easing the socioeconomic and psychological anxiety..." from [48]
  • [49]: "Peter Ladefoged was born..." from [50], "Soon after moving to Los Angeles ..." from [51], "...dissertation was on..." from [52]
  • [53]: "...suffered a small stroke..." from [54], "During his [academic] career..." from [55]

to name a few. Nardog (talk) 09:33, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following IP may be related to Sdjones:

Nardog (talk) 16:55, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Since no one has responded to this formidable task, I have now removed almost all of their violating contributions and filed revdel requests as well as MfD of User:Piotrus/South Korean scandals. That said, there may be more violations in these account/IP's contributions and may be more IPs or sockpuppets. Nardog (talk) 22:35, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Lanlan0122

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Contributor_copyright_investigations/Archive/Declined_2014-2018&oldid=1087820097"