Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2011 April 6
Appearance
- USCGC Acacia (WLB-406) (history · last edit) from http://www.aai-acacia.org/406_History.html. See also talk page. Brad (talk) 18:44, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
- Based on some timing and subtle wording (i.e., "homeported" versus "homeport was") (Grand Haven v. Charlevoix homeport in the original) I think the original is actually taken from http://www.uscg.mil/history/webcutters/Acacia1944.pdf, or rather an older/similar version of it. I think the source mentioned above is closely written from the same original source, and the source from the talk page is a Wikipedia mirror. I'm not seeing a clear-cut case, though. VernoWhitney (talk) 14:49, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for finding the original. Looking more deeply just in case there was some cross-polination. {{dupdet|1=http://www.uscg.mil/history/webcutters/Acacia1944.pdf|2=http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=USCGC_Acacia_%28WLB-406%29&oldid=422731514}}; {{dupdet|1=http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=USCGC_Acacia_%28WLB-406%29&oldid=422731514|2=http://www.aai-acacia.org/406_History.html}}; {{dupdet|1=http://www.laesser.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=127:acacia&catid=35:180-tenders&Itemid=12|2=http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=USCGC_Acacia_%28WLB-406%29&oldid=422731514}}
- Okay. Clearly we couldn't have copied from [1]. This was taken from our article at some point after the decommissioning. Most of the content was already on Wikipedia at the time that the decomissioning was only scheduled; see [2]. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:18, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
- What's concerning to me at this point: our article has in common with [3] some of this sentence: "The cutter is a multi-purpose vessel, nominally a buoy tender, but with equipment and capabilities for ice breaking, search and rescue, fire fighting, logistics, and other tasks." That does not seem to be in the public domain PDF. Looking into it further. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:23, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
- Ah, and I believe they copied from us, too. Not only was it written after the ship was decommissioned, but note that the number of ships involved changed in June 2006, after the ship was decommissioned: [4]. The other website includes the later figure. There's also this evidence of natural evolution: [5], [6],[7]. I think this is all ours. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:32, 24 April 2011 (UTC)