Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2009 March 6

• American Involvement in Haiti (history · last edit) from http://www.multinationalmonitor.org/hyper/issues/1985/12/ebert.html

This is where the first version was copied from. I believe that everything else in the article has been copied from one source or another. RenegadeMonster (talk) 09:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

I only noted one small section copied, and only one sentence word for word. That could've been easily fixed. I see plenty of references for other things. I'll go and Google other things between quotation marks to see if the rest is plagiarized from somewhere. Discussing things on the article's talk page, instead of just locking the article so no one can edit it until an administrator looks into it, would've been preferred. Dream Focus 10:02, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Have fun. RenegadeMonster (talk) 10:15, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

You can add to the sources; the "October 15, 1995" entry was drawn from that verbatim. That website's license is not compatible with Wikipedia's. I have not checked other sections of the page, since this will not come due for closure for 7 days, but it does lead to the likeliness that other infringement exists. If you wish to write a clean version of the article, you're more than welcome to do so in the temporary space linked from the article's face. Please verify that other sections are not also copyright infringement as you do, since any copyright infringement will have to be removed. Note that even text that was written on Wikipedia will have be rewritten unless you acknowledge the contributors. (For an example of how I have handled that, you might want to see .) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:46, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the History Commons website clearly states it is open content and links to the wikipedia article about that, which says wikipedia is open content as well. You can take anything from it that you want. It allows anyone to edit information. So no copyright problems exist. Dream Focus 16:47, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid the license is incompatible. If you read the bottom of the source page, it says, "Except where otherwise noted, the textual content of each timeline is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike." CC-BY-SA is not compatible with GFDL, and noncommercial SA is particularly not-compatible. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

I've added a few more likely sources of text to the article. Worth comparison also is this, which includes Verhoogen and may have been used for other sections. I don't have time to compare right now, and, again, this doesn't come current for closure for seven days. The NCL website plainly bears copyright notice, Copyright © 2006 NLC. Any efforts to rewrite this article should probably begin with a close comparison there, though also of use are various plagiarism checkers and simple google searches for strings of text. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:24, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Dream Focus started a temporary page on the 9th, but seems to have abandoned it. It is also a copyright infringement, duplicating text from the blanked article. I have advised and asked his or her intentions. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:03, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

• Intars Busulis (history · last edit) from . ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 16:26, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Y Cleaned. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:12, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
• Casa Loma (history · last edit) from http://www.casaloma.org/.
  • At least part of this article was copied from http://www.casaloma.org/History/history5.asp as well as the next history page and perhaps the previous pages too in part; and a lot of the rest seemed to clearly be promotional text before I knocked off weasel words. It's still a copyvio tho; I just haven't found the source. TheHYPO (talk) 18:25, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
  • It seems mostly from the press release/media kit part of the site. Back in January I blanked a section which was taken verbatim from http://www.casaloma.org/Media/Kit/PressDisplay.asp?Display=Press&PressReleaseID=34, and felt that there was likely more. However, I couldn't find anything else that matched word-for-word and so just left a warning on the talk page. --coldacid (talk|contrib) 05:07, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Another possible source for copied text: http://www.galenfrysinger.com/ontario_toronto_casa_loma.htm --coldacid (talk|contrib) 05:21, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
    • That one indicates "Text from Wikipedia." I am currently doing a history check of the article to see where infringement may have been introduced. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:41, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
      • Y Having done an edit-by-edit check of the article's history, I can assert that it developed naturally until March 15, 2008, when text from the website was introduced by User:RescueTeam. I've selectively deleted all subsequent edits and merged older material into the new "temporary" version. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:58, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

• Center for Experimental Media Arts (history · last edit) from . Nomination completed by DumbBOT (talk) 00:10, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
• Deep Black (history · last edit) from . Nomination completed by DumbBOT (talk) 00:10, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Y Already cleaned. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:05, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
• Little Women (musical) (history · last edit) from . Nomination completed by DumbBOT (talk) 00:10, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Y Unfortunately, effort to rewrite that was there constituted a derivative text. I've revised completely. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:13, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
• Jalaluddin Masud Jani (history · last edit) (url not detected). Nomination completed by DumbBOT (talk) 00:10, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Y Selectively deleted. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:16, 14 March 2009 (UTC)