Jump to content

Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2011 April 6

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Evaluated

SCV for 2011-04-06 Edit

Copyright investigations (manual article tagging)
[edit]
  • Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. Found source (added by an IP so didn't see much point relisting). Needs Revdels from here. January (talk) 14:48, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]