Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2013 December 16

• {{anchor|:Social Phobia and Anxiety Inventory}}:Social Phobia and Anxiety Inventory ([{{fullurl::Social Phobia and Anxiety Inventory|action=history}} history] · [{{fullurl::Social Phobia and Anxiety Inventory|diff=0}} last edit] · rewrite) from http://www.mhs.com/product.aspx?gr=cli&id=overview&prod=spai. I was starting to look into Spanish-language copyvio, but before I could even get beyond the English language sources, I found cut-and-paste. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:21, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

:: I found more cut-and-paste at public speaking; going through all of this editor's contribs. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:37, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

• {{anchor|:Criticism of Jainism}}:Criticism of Jainism ([{{fullurl::Criticism of Jainism|action=history}} history] · [{{fullurl::Criticism of Jainism|diff=0}} last edit] · rewrite) from BBC source cited. Itsmejudith (talk) 22:41, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

::The page in question is at AfD, where the discussion is rather heated. Based on discussion there, the known copyvio is in one section of the page, sourced to the BBC, and we do not know whether the problems extend to the rest of the page. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:03, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

::::The BBC source cited is used for a limited section of page - I don't know why whole page was blanked. One can go thru Talk page where you can see mulitple long-term editors had created after debate and consensus, which sources can be used and what type of criticism can be added. Further, nominator has admmited on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticism of Jainism that she did not go into detail which sections were troublesome. I have also mention of AfD that there are additional sources like this - [http://books.google.co.in/books?id=BCY4AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA71&dq=Jainism+women+body+kills+mensuration&hl=en&sa=X&ei=HL2vUu_-LsKWrgfap4GADA&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Jainism%20women%20body%20kills%20mensuration&f=false Sexual Knowledge, Sexual Science: The History of Attitudes to Sexuality edited by Roy Porter, Mikuláš Teich page 71] - which say somewhat what BBC source says. Additional sources are available on-line for what I think the nominator is saying is a copy-vio. Jethwarp (talk) 04:22, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

:::::I blanked the whole page because I would like it all to be checked for possible copyvio. Thanks. Itsmejudith (talk) 09:15, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

:::::::You should be more specific which section is copy vio and from which source do you think it is copy paste. In middle of AfD discussions you just cannot blank an article just becoz you would like it to be checked..huh!!! If any section needs a tag there is also provision for tagging a particular section but you chose to blank whole article just because you want it to be checked...Wow...that is an amazing argument. Jethwarp (talk) 10:11, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

:::::::: Right on Jethwarp, this sounds like "temporary blank", because the user is unable to blank the page or delete it. Anyone will think that this page is ripped off from BBC, even though it's not. Never saw such circus before in wikipedia either. Bladesmulti (talk) 10:19, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

{{od}}

Removed BBC, no further investigation was made either. Bladesmulti (talk) 03:20, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

:Unless there is something further of which I am unaware (such as other sources on this page, or other pages created by the editor who had added the BBC material to this page), the problems have now been fixed per WP:DCV, and this investigation can be closed. --Tryptofish (talk) 14:35, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

::Hi. I've done a spot-check and found lingering issues with one source page. I think this should be easily cleanable. There's an awful lot of copying from other Wikipedia articles, but it looks like all of this was properly attributed to avoid copyright issues. Bladesmulti, I appreciate your work towards rewriting (although you should not remove the template yourself), but you seem to suggest in your [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Criticism_of_Jainism&diff=588014761&oldid=588012961 edit summary] here that changing the citation eliminates the problem. It doesn't; it actually just creates an issue with Wikipedia:Plagiarism. (For instance, you left this in the article: "As per Indian law, euthanasia is banned and suicide is a crime. In Rajasthan, it was petitioned that High Court of Rajasthan should declare santhara illegal." The [http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/jainism/customs/fasting_1.shtml BBC page] that was previously too closely paraphrased there says, "In India euthanasia is banned and suicide is a crime.") The problem is not in the citation, but in the close following of language in the original. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 21:48, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

:::Euthanasia is such a dictionary word, but changed "banned" with "outlawed"... Bladesmulti (talk) 03:35, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

::::The point is not that it's a dictionary word, Bladesmulti - the point is that information was taken from a source that was cited, and now the source is not cited. Removing the citation only obscures where the information came from; it doesn't change where the information came from. :) Plagiarism and copyright issues can be related, but are not the same thing. Plagiarism is about giving proper credit; copyright issues are about not using too much material or using material improperly from a copyrighted source. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:03, 3 January 2014 (UTC)