Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems/Without online source

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mahagaja (talk | contribs) at 20:29, 20 February 2006 (innocent until proven guilty). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

I'd like to propose a change of process here for suspected infringements without a source.

The problem: In the current process, an article will get listed here, and everyone will agree that, yes, it kind of looks like a copyright violation, but then again it might not be. So it sits here forever, taking up space on the WP:CP page.

My proposal: If you suspect a copyright violation, but can't find a source, then don't list it here; instead, tag it with {{cv-unsure}} on the talk page. This tag takes in 2 parameters: your username and the oldid of the article version. So you would use it like {{cv-unsure|Quadell|40204547}}. The template in this case would look like this: Template:Cv-unsure This would automatically add the article to Category:Suspected copyright infringements without a source. What do you think? Is this a good idea? – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 14:14, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of points:
  1. Do we still blank the article? I figure we do, since the purpose of blanking is to prevent us displaying text we have a suspicion regarding (and to discourage mirrors, who seem to display the tag anyway!). If we don't, then this will result in talk pages getting this tag, them never getting actioned in the same way as at present, and us continuing to display text that is semi-knowingly illegal.
  2. We should definitely not use the language of consensus, since copyright infringement is not a matter of consensus. People often make this mistake. It either infringes or it does not, and we do not get to 'vote' on it. An admin who concludes it infringes, should delete it irrespective of the numeric balance of the discussion. Clearly discussion is fine, and can help clarify the issue, but it's not like a *fD process, where consensus rules.
-Splashtalk 14:51, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Good points. When it comes to suspected infringements without online source (SIWOS), people generally don't blank the page or add the copyvio tag, since they're not sure it's a violation. I would think this would be the same here. If you're sure enough to blank it, then go ahead and list it on WP:CP. But if it just looks like a copyvio (but might be someone's own work, or might be a PD US-Gov publication), then just put the tag on the talk page. If we aren't pretty sure that an article is a copyvio, I don't think we should remove the content. Since it will have a category, people can go through them, so they shouldn't wither on the vine. And if they do, it may be because it's not actually a copyvio.
So far as the word "consensus" goes, you're right. I'll change it. – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 17:32, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Another thing to keep in mind is that it is impossible to prove a negative, so the burden of proof is on the person making the positive claim. If Smith posts a text, and Jones claims "This looks like a copyright violation to me", it's up to Jones to prove it is one, not up to Smith to prove it isn't one. Angr/talk 20:29, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Copyright_problems/Without_online_source&oldid=40471738"