Jump to content

Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Cheeseladder: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→Background: background
Cheeseladder (talk | contribs)
1,348 edits
→Background: Final comments
Line 50: Line 50:
::I Have now re-written the phrasing that so offended [[User:Justlettersandnumbers|Justlettersandnumbers]]</br>[[User:Cheeseladder|Cheeseladder]] ([[User talk:Cheeseladder|talk]]) 14:01, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
::I Have now re-written the phrasing that so offended [[User:Justlettersandnumbers|Justlettersandnumbers]]</br>[[User:Cheeseladder|Cheeseladder]] ([[User talk:Cheeseladder|talk]]) 14:01, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
:::::It is not the relatively short passage you copy-pasted that so offends me, {{u|Cheeseladder}}, it's the fact that even after this request was made and you were made aware of the existing problems you've created, you continue to make copy-paste additions to the project. To my mind, that shows either entrenched ignorance of our policies, or a determined refusal to abide by them. Which is it? [[User:Justlettersandnumbers|Justlettersandnumbers]] ([[User talk:Justlettersandnumbers|talk]]) 15:42, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
:::::It is not the relatively short passage you copy-pasted that so offends me, {{u|Cheeseladder}}, it's the fact that even after this request was made and you were made aware of the existing problems you've created, you continue to make copy-paste additions to the project. To my mind, that shows either entrenched ignorance of our policies, or a determined refusal to abide by them. Which is it? [[User:Justlettersandnumbers|Justlettersandnumbers]] ([[User talk:Justlettersandnumbers|talk]]) 15:42, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

*I am fully aware of how Wikipedia works as far as copyrighting is concerned. I do not need to be accused of ignorance over this. As you all are aware original research work is not allowed on this project and so all work has to be referenced from somewhere. I have alway vigorously tried to comply with the idea of references to text claims in articles I have contributed to. Unfortunately I may have used words and sentences which as Moonriddengirl pointed out to me was close paraphrasing. I repeat this was unintentional. Then the next stage of my problems seems to have occurred in the last week


*This all seems to have started with work I had began on a user page as a sandbox for an article which had not been submitted but was in the process of developing. On this test page inadvertently included an image which I add from an existing article, not aware of the copyright issues arising from the original up-loader of this image, which by the way was nothing to do with me. A keen copyright editor spotted this and removed it from my test page with no contact or explanation and when, I then politely asked him to explain his actions and asked him to contact me if he wished to make further changes to my user page. If he had dropped a small note on my talk page in the first place I would have removed the offending image immediately. I complained to him on his talk page but was rebuffed. This seems to have opened a can of worms for myself as the editor called [[User:Justlettersandnumbers]] to go through the page with a fine toothcomb and this editor managed to find some the very sort phrase ''trying to retrieve the body of Ralph Fox'' from a webpage called [http://spartacus-educational.com/SPcornford.htm Fred Copman] I had written the note that is undeniable, but I wrote it from scratch in my own brief words having read a passage from a book called ''Heroic Voices of the Spanish Civil War'' in which on page 91 is a personal account by Peter Kerrigan, a volunteer, who talks about the death of Ralph Fox and the need to recover his body. this was done and the easiest way to explain this action and the loss of life of John Cornford was to right the passage that was identical to the Spartacus text. I am obliged to [[User:Justlettersandnumbers]] for pointing this out and so I changed it immediately. I now feel that i have become the target of a witch hunt by both [[User:Justlettersandnumbers]] and [[User:Stefan2]], a situation that I was leaving my self open to as breifly warned about by [[User:Andy Dingley]] [[User talk:Cheeseladder#Fred Copeman|here]] when he commented ''There are even one or two NFC-busy admins who will probably threaten blocks against you for arguing, because they enjoy that. Also you had the temerity to start writing an article, and don't you know how much extra paperwork all these articles create for the WikiBureaucracy?!''
:::Well I have decided that I will save you all the trouble of an investigation. I suggest that you delete every contribution that has been made to the project by User:cheeseladder. I have only contributed to the project in Good Faith but this seems not to be enough here now so as of today I am resigning from making any further contributions her. None of us need to be cyber bullied, and the best way to stop a bully is to take away his amunition.[[User:Cheeseladder|Cheeseladder]] ([[User talk:Cheeseladder|talk]]) 09:24, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
</div>
</div>


Revision as of 09:24, 15 June 2014

This page has been removed from search engines' indexes.

Contributor copyright investigation

This CCI cleanup subpage has been opened because concerns of multiple point infringement have been substantiated and further steps are necessary to address the serious risk of copyright violation from the listed contributor. Listings are not intended to imply a presumption of bad faith on the part of any contributor, as copyright laws vary widely around the world and many contributors who violate Wikipedia's copyrights policy do so inadvertently through not understanding it or the United States' laws that govern it.

If you are here because of a note on an article's talk page explaining removal of text, please do not restore any removed text without first ensuring that the text does not duplicate, closely paraphrase or plagiarize from a previously published source. You are welcome to use sourced facts that may have been removed to create new content in your own words or to incorporate brief quotations of copyrighted material in accordance with the non-free content policy and guideline.

Instructions

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}}

Text

  • 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 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}}.
  • 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.

Images

  • Examine the images below. For free images:
    • Does the image look non-free? Is it likely the uploader is the copyright holder?
    • Is the image properly licensed and sourced? Be aware of images that say "this image is licensed under X" without specifying who created it.
    • Do a reverse image search using Google Images. Check the license of the source page. Compare the last modified time with the (Commons) upload time.
    • Do a Google image search for phrases that describe the image's contents.
    • See Wikipedia:Guide to image deletion#Addressing suspected copyright infringement on dealing with cases of possible image copyright infringement. There is no need to open a possibly unfree files listing. Administrators may delete images from multiple point infringers presumptively in accordance with Wikipedia:Copyright violations. Evaluators who are not administrators may section images into a "deletion requested" section for administrator attention.
  • For non-free images, determine whether each image meets our non-free content criteria.
    • Note that Commons does not accept non-free content.
  • Annotate the listing with the action taken, e.g. if the image was tagged no source write "no source"; if the fair use claim is deemed ok you can write "OK fair use".

Background

 Cheeseladder

I hate to add to the workoad, but I think this one has to be accepted. A post here led me to User:Cheeseladder/Civil War, where I immediately found copying (brief but blatant) from here. Cheeseladder apparently has little or no understanding of our copyright policies. If, as I think Moonriddengirl believes, there isn't too much of concern here then this should be over quite quickly. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:23, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Which passage from this website do you think I have copy-violated. If it is the passage trying to retrieve the body of Ralph Fox is a fact recalled in several books and scripts of the incident. It is a Fact and not a copy viol. This is a stitch up by this editor because I criticised one of his fellow editors behaviour.Cheeseladder (talk) 11:46, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I Have now re-written the phrasing that so offended Justlettersandnumbers
Cheeseladder (talk) 14:01, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is not the relatively short passage you copy-pasted that so offends me, Cheeseladder, it's the fact that even after this request was made and you were made aware of the existing problems you've created, you continue to make copy-paste additions to the project. To my mind, that shows either entrenched ignorance of our policies, or a determined refusal to abide by them. Which is it? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:42, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am fully aware of how Wikipedia works as far as copyrighting is concerned. I do not need to be accused of ignorance over this. As you all are aware original research work is not allowed on this project and so all work has to be referenced from somewhere. I have alway vigorously tried to comply with the idea of references to text claims in articles I have contributed to. Unfortunately I may have used words and sentences which as Moonriddengirl pointed out to me was close paraphrasing. I repeat this was unintentional. Then the next stage of my problems seems to have occurred in the last week


  • This all seems to have started with work I had began on a user page as a sandbox for an article which had not been submitted but was in the process of developing. On this test page inadvertently included an image which I add from an existing article, not aware of the copyright issues arising from the original up-loader of this image, which by the way was nothing to do with me. A keen copyright editor spotted this and removed it from my test page with no contact or explanation and when, I then politely asked him to explain his actions and asked him to contact me if he wished to make further changes to my user page. If he had dropped a small note on my talk page in the first place I would have removed the offending image immediately. I complained to him on his talk page but was rebuffed. This seems to have opened a can of worms for myself as the editor called User:Justlettersandnumbers to go through the page with a fine toothcomb and this editor managed to find some the very sort phrase trying to retrieve the body of Ralph Fox from a webpage called Fred Copman I had written the note that is undeniable, but I wrote it from scratch in my own brief words having read a passage from a book called Heroic Voices of the Spanish Civil War in which on page 91 is a personal account by Peter Kerrigan, a volunteer, who talks about the death of Ralph Fox and the need to recover his body. this was done and the easiest way to explain this action and the loss of life of John Cornford was to right the passage that was identical to the Spartacus text. I am obliged to User:Justlettersandnumbers for pointing this out and so I changed it immediately. I now feel that i have become the target of a witch hunt by both User:Justlettersandnumbers and User:Stefan2, a situation that I was leaving my self open to as breifly warned about by User:Andy Dingley here when he commented There are even one or two NFC-busy admins who will probably threaten blocks against you for arguing, because they enjoy that. Also you had the temerity to start writing an article, and don't you know how much extra paperwork all these articles create for the WikiBureaucracy?!
Well I have decided that I will save you all the trouble of an investigation. I suggest that you delete every contribution that has been made to the project by User:cheeseladder. I have only contributed to the project in Good Faith but this seems not to be enough here now so as of today I am resigning from making any further contributions her. None of us need to be cyber bullied, and the best way to stop a bully is to take away his amunition.Cheeseladder (talk) 09:24, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Contribution survey

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

This report covers contributions to 73 articles from timestamp 2013-04-14 11:34:00 UTC to timestamp 2014-06-11 18:17:15 UTC.

Articles 1 through 20

Articles 21 through 40

Articles 41 through 60

Articles 61 through 73

This report generated by Contribution Surveyor at 2014-06-14T15:53:03+00:00 in 0.13 sec.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Contributor_copyright_investigations/Cheeseladder&oldid=612991470"