Jump to content

Wikipedia:Copyright problems/Instructions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcuts

This is a guide for administrators, clerks, and any interested editors working through Wikipedia:Copyright problems. The main copyright problems page has a link to each day's daily log page. The 'edit' link for the daily log page can be reached from the main copyright problems page. There is some guidance for handling Category:Possible copyright violations but it is not the focus of this guide.

Copyright cleanup is a very complex area of Wikipedia and has nuance that is impossible to fully capture within a how-to guide. Use discretion as you see fit to address articles, and ask for help on the talk page as needed.

Investigation process

[edit]

Every article tagged for a copyright problem needs investigation. The process includes comparing the article and source, assessing the copyright status of the source, and possibly verifying permission to reuse text. For listings at the copyright problems board, there may be relevant comments from other editors at the board itself or on the article's talk page; remember to check for these.

Identifying the source

[edit]

Sometimes articles are tagged with {{copyvio}} without a source being named. Frequently, articles tagged for {{Close paraphrasing}} or {{Copypaste}} do not identify their sources. If the source is not obvious, a Google search using quotation marks "" around suspicious sentences or a scan with The Earwig's tool can help. Most articles copy from the sources cited; only a few rare cases do not. If you cannot find a source, consider who placed the tag, and who added the alleged copyright violation. If it looks like disruption, remove the tag. Otherwise, handling depends on which tag it is.

  • {{Copypaste}} tags are frequently used when people have a sense that something is off, but no evidence. If no source is given or found, remove the {{Copypaste}} tag from the article.
  • {{Close paraphrasing}} tags are usually placed with a source in mind, but if no source can be found and no examples are given, we cannot process them. Remove the tag with a note at the talk page requesting more information if it is restored.
  • {{Copyvio}} tags should not be placed without sources. If the tag seems to have been placed in good faith by a registered contributor or active IP, ask for the source. If the tagger is not available for comment and you cannot find the source, the tag may be removed and the content may be restored.

If a source is located, you can proceed with evaluating the issue.

Evaluating the issue

[edit]

Go through each question. They can be answered by a yes, no, or maybe. If the answer to any question is no, there is not a copyright problem and that should be communicated either on the talk page or the copyright problems listing.

  1. Is the article the same as or similar to the suspected source?
    1. Compare the article to the suspected source. If the suspected source is not online or is not accessible, outsourcing may be required. Resource requests, The Wikipedia Library, Interlibrary loans at a local library, or buying the content yourself are some possible work arounds. You are not expected to purchase sources for copyright problems.
    2. If the edit that introduced the alleged copyright violation is a recent one, CopyPatrol may have a report on it. When the bot marks a revision for review at CopyPatrol, it creates a log entry on the page. Entering the article's name (if the article is a Draft, remove the "Draft:" from the title, otherwise you will get no results) into the search bar and selecting "All cases" will show all reports made involving the article.
    3. Superficial alterations to copyrighted text and substantial close paraphrasing are insufficient to avoid copyright infringement.
    4. Unauthorized translations of copyrighted works are copyright violations. This includes translations by editors from non-free sources.
    5. Extensive quotations may also be a copyright infringement, even when clearly marked.
  2. Did the suspected source publish the content before Wikipedia?
    1. Wikipedia has many mirrors and forks, and articles are frequently copied to other sites and publications (both with and without attribution).
    2. See if the page mentions Wikipedia by name, links to Wikipedia pages, and/or has the same citation placement as the Wikipedia page.
    3. Check the date of the source to the article history. The Internet Archive can help determine the age of a particular page or text.
    4. If you cannot verify the age of the source, examine the introduction of text. Large chunks of unwikified text added in one revision are usually copied from another source. If the text seems to have evolved naturally at Wikipedia, then it probably is not a copyright violation.
    5. If the editor adding the text has a history of copyright violations or is using a markedly different tone between articles not explained by switching topic areas, the text may be a copyright violation.
    6. Official or reputable sources are less likely to have mirrored Wikipedia's content without attribution, although it sometimes does happen. Almost all articles on Wikipedia have been duplicated by three to five different BlogSpot sites.
    7. If you confirm that another source is duplicating a Wikipedia article without obvious credit, tag the article's talk page with {{Backwards copy}}.
  3. Is the text copyrighted?
    1. Copyright is presumed unless it can be explicitly verified otherwise.
      1. Licensed computer programs are not compatible with Wikipedia's licensing, unless they are in the public domain.
    2. Check the copyright status of the suspected source to see if the content is public domain or licensed under a compatible license. (See license compatibility table)
    3. Wikipedia:Public domain, Wikisource:Help:Public domain, Commons:Commons:Hirtle chart, and Commons:Commons:Copyright rules by territory can also offer guidance.
    4. Statements like 'all rights reserved', 'Copyright 2XXX', 'non-commercial use only', 'educational use only' or 'permission granted to Wikipedia' are not compliant with our licensing requirements.
    5. Check the "About this site", "copyright", "FAQ", or "Terms of Use" sections of websites if necessary.

Checking for permission

[edit]

When an editor gives credible claim of permission or ownership, they should be given notice of how to proceed under Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials or Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission and time to confirm permission. We usually allow seven days for this to happen. The article either remains templated or is reverted to its previous state while awaiting permission.

Claims of permission are frequently found on talk pages, edit summaries, or user talk pages of editors. The name of a particular editor may also inform plausible permission. If a contributor has claimed permission, but was not notified of the process to verify that claim, relist under the current date. {{copyvio}} provides instructions for verification, so if an editor has been active on the article or its talk page after blanking they are presumed aware. Likewise, if an editor has been advised in the past, they do not need a separate notice for each new copyright problem.

Every claim of permission must be verified. Once verification is received, close the listing and revert the page blanking/text removal. If permission is not received in due time, it is treated as a regular copyright violation. Alert the editor using {{Copyright update}}.

VRT
Permission received by the Volunteer Response Team is logged at the article's talk page by an VRT agent, usually with {{Ticket confirmation}}. The VRT agent who responds should remove any copyright warnings from the article's face and add any required attribution. {{Permission pending}} and {{Permission received}} are not verification of permission. However, if the article's talk has been tagged {{Permission received}}, check with the VRT agent who tagged it for an update before deleting the article as unverified (see below). If the article has been tagged {{Permission pending}} for 1 month, it may be considered unverified. VRT agents can restore deleted articles if the VRT permission clears past deadline.
External website
If no VRT verification has been provided, check to see if a link has been provided to a licensing statement somewhere on the article's source. (You will have presumably already checked the obvious locations during the investigation process.) If it has, check the provided link to see if it holds a usable licensing statement which specifies that the material is licensed compatibly with CC-By-SA. If you verify that a usable licensing statement exists, log your confirmation at the article's talk and provide attribution if needed in the article.
[edit]

If you find copyright violations and there is no credible claim or confirmation of permission, the text needs to be removed. You are given discretion on how to handle listings, please use it as you see fit.

  • If a rewrite has been proposed: New content is proposed at the temporary subpage /Temp linked on the copyright problem's listing. Sometimes, partial rewrites are done on the article directly and needs to be checked there.
    • Check that the content is properly attributed if needed,
    • Check that the rewrite is free of copyright violations and close paraphrasing,
    • Move the rewrite into place.
      • Non-admins should note on the listing that the rewrite is ready to be moved into place.
      • You can delete the article and move the rewrite, especially if no content was copied over.
      • You can also manually history merge the two articles and use revision deletion on the old content.
  • If the article has no salvageable content or history: Delete the article if it meets WP:CSD#G12 or if it has been listed at the copyright problems board for seven days and meets all of the following conditions:
    • Most or all of the text is a copyright violation.
    • There is no credible claim or confirmation of permission.
    • There is no clean version to restore to and little to no salvageable content that remains if all copyright violations were removed.
      • In practice, this amounts to deleting articles when all that would remain is a one sentence stub.
    Non-admins may request G12 as appropriate or note on listings that the article should be deleted. Do not request G12 for less blatant copyright violations, patrolling admins at CSD will generally not delete them if they are from Copyright problems.
    There is a dropdown deletion rationale for Copyright problems deletions. Please link to the daily log page in your deletion rationale
  • If there are clean versions or salvageable content:
    • Revert or remove the copyright violations from the article using an appropriate edit summary.
    • You may leave a note at the article talk page ({{cclean}}).
    • Consider revision deletion if the size of violation and amount of revisions to delete are in appropriate proportion to each other.
      • Oftentimes, for non-immediate reverts, a minimum of 500 bytes of removed text is used and scales with the amount of revisions to hide. Additionally, long-standing content or content that has many intervening edits should not be revision deleted without careful consideration.
  • If the article is listed for presumptive deletion: Delete or stubbify after 7 days.
    • Check that the article is foundationally by the given CCI subject and any sockpuppets and suspected IPs.
    • If there is some content by other editors, stubbify everything around that content. Discretion may be applied if the content by other editors is very minimal, like light copyedits or one to two sentences. Citations can either be commented out using <!-- --> or moved to the References section.
    • CCI participants typically do not send articles to copyright problems for presumptive removal, instead seeking deletion. Most of the time, they will stubbify the article themselves.
    • There is a dropdown deletion rationale provided. Link to the given CCI case when deleting.

Closing the investigation

[edit]
  • If you deleted the article, no further action is necessary except to notate the listing on Copyright problems.
  • For any other action, including no copyright violations found, remove {{copyvio}} and {{copyvio/bottom}} and note your actions on the listing.
  • If you have confirmed any copyright violations, check the contributor's talk page and history to see if any further cleanup or prevention of future copyright problems is required. Some editors may need to be referred to Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations.
  • When all entries on a day's log at Copyright problems have been resolved, remove the day's daily log page from Copyright problems.

Old daily log pages can be found at [[Wikipedia:Copyright problems/year month day]] or [[Wikipedia:Copyright problems/year month day/Images]].

Notation templates

[edit]

The notation templates used by admins and clerks are found below. They can also be located in the edit notice at the top of every page in the "copyright problems" space.

Images

[edit]
See also: Wikipedia:Guide to image deletion

Copyright Problems does not handle images. Please tag images for either speedy deletion, proposed deletion, or Files for discussion if there are issues with their licensing or non-free status.

Useful scripts and tools

[edit]

See also

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Copyright_problems/Instructions&oldid=1319561147"