Wikipedia:Copyright problems

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Jump to: navigation, search

Purge server cache to refresh this page if recent edits are not visible.

Blatant copyright infringements may now be "speedied"

If an article and all its revisions are unquestionably copied from the website of a commercial content provider and there is no assertion of permission, ownership or fair use and none seems likely, and the article is less than 48 hours old, it may be speedily deleted. See CSD A8 for full conditions.

After notifying the uploading editor by using wording similar to:

{{nothanks-sd|pg=page name|url=url of source}} -- ~~~~

Blank the page and replace the text with

{{db-copyvio|url=url of source}}

An administrator will examine the article and decide whether to speedily delete it or not.

Note that speedy deletion applies only to articles, that is text; and only when the source is a commercial content provider, that is someone engaged in directly making money off the content.

Note: In general, copyright exists automatically, upon publication: an author does not need to apply for or even claim copyright for a copyright to exist. Only an explicit statement that the material is public domain or available under the GFDL makes material useable, unless it is inherently free of copyright due to its age or source. Under Wikipedia:Fair use policy, brief selections of copyrighted text may be used, but only with full attribution and only when the purpose is to comment on or criticize the text quoted.


This page has a backlog that requires attention of one or more experienced editors.
(please remove this notice when the backlog is cleared up)

This page is intended for listing and discussing possible copyright problems on Wikipedia, including pages and images which are suspected to be infringements.

For requesting copyright examination before including questionable content to a Wikipedia article use Wikipedia:Requested copyright examinations instead.

Notice to copyright owners: If you believe Wikipedia is infringing your copyright, you may choose to raise the issue using Wikipedia:Request for immediate removal of copyright violation. Alternatively, you may choose to contact Wikipedia's designated agent under the terms of the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act.

On the other hand, if you see an article somewhere else which you believe was copied from the Wikipedia without attribution, visit the GFDL compliance page or meta:Non-compliant site coordination.



If you find a page or image on Wikipedia which you believe to be a copyright infringement, follow the instructions below.

In all other cases, and always with images, follow these instructions instead:

Article? Image?
  • Revert the page to a non-copyrighted version if you can — and you're done!
    The infringing text will remain in the page history for archival reasons unless the copyright holder asks the Wikimedia Foundation to remove it.
  • If all revisions have copyright problems:
    • Blank the page and replace the text with
      {{copyvio|url=insert URL here}} ~~~~ .
    • Go to today's section and add
      * {{subst:article-cv | PageName}} from [insert URL here] ~~~~
    to the bottom of the list. Put the page's name in place of "PageName". If there is not a URL, use a description of the source.
    • Include the page's name in your edit summary, and press save.
    • Optionally, add {{subst:nothanks | name of article}} to the article creator's talk page.
    • You're done!
  • Add the following to the image description page:
    {{imagevio|url=insert URL here}} ~~~~
  • Go to today's section and add:
    * {{subst:article-cv |:Image:ImageName}} from [insert URL here] ~~~~
to the bottom of the list.
  • Include the image's name in your edit summary, and press save.
  • Optionally, add {{subst:idw-cp | Image:name of image}} to the image uploader's talk page. (See usage below.)
  • You're done!

Page titles should stay listed for a minimum of 7 days before a decision is made.

Deletion Tools

Articles ( howto / log )


Templates ( howto / log )

{{tfd|}} {{subst:tfdnotice|}}

Images ( howto / log )

{{subst:ifd}} {{subst:idw|}}

Categories ( howto / log / C )

{{subst:cfd}} {{subst:cfd2||text=}}
{{cfr|}} {{cfm|}} {{subst:cfr2|||text=}}
{{cfdu|SEC}} {{cfru|NEW|SEC}}
====[[:SEC]]==== {{cfd-article|}}

Stub types

{{sfd-t}} {{sfd-c}} {{sfd-r}}

Miscellaneous {{md1}}
Copyvios {{copyvio}}
Deletion review

{{mergeto}} {{mergefrom}}

Redirects {{rfd}}
Page moves


Speedy {{delete}} {{db}}

Patent {{nonsense}}
Empty {{empty}}
Vanity {{db-bio}}
Attacks {{db-attack}}
Copyvios {{db-copyvio}}
{{db-vandalism}} {{vandalism}}

Unfree images

{{pui}} {{PUIdisputed}}
{{no source}} {{no license}}
{{or-fu-re}} {{or-fu-nr}}

{{Move to Wiktionary}}
{{Move to Wikisource}}
{{Move to Wikibooks}}
{{Move to Wikibooks Cookbook}}
{{Move to Wikiquote}}

Deletion policy / log / watchlist


In addition to nominating potential copyright infringements for deletion, you could:

  • Replace the article's text with new (re-written) content of your own: This can be done on a temp page, so that the original "copyvio version" may be deleted by a sysop. Temp versions should be written at a page like: [[PAGE NAME/temp]]. If the original turns out to be non-infringing, these two can be merged.
  • Write to the owner of the copyright to check whether they gave permission (or maybe they in fact posted it here!).
  • Ask for permission - see wikipedia:boilerplate request for permission, Wikipedia:Confirmation of permission

Instructions for special cases

  • Category:Unfree images: These may be listed, if they indeed are not available under a free license or a reasonable fair use rationale. Note that some of these may not actually be unfree images, but rather images which are released under multiple licenses.
These images are available for use on the Wikipedia web site, but are not released under the GFDL. According to Jimbo Wales, we cannot use images that are not GFDL and are not usable under a fair use rationale [1]. Images from these categories may be listed here, but be sure that the image is not also available under a free license, and that a fair use claim cannot be made.
From the mailing list:
As of today, all *new* images which are *non commercial only* and *with permission only* should be deleted on sight. Older images should go through a process of VfD to eliminate them in an orderly fashion, taking due account of "fair use". (Jimbo) :Full Email, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
See also this followup: [2]

Clearing copyvios

After being listed here for seven days, possible copyright infringements should be checked and processed by administrators. See Wikipedia:Copyright problems/Advice for admins for some help.

See also

Listings of possible copyright problems

Older than 7 days

Below are articles and images that have been listed here for longer than a week, but have not yet been dealt with for specific reasons.

Poster claims to be the author or to have permission

This section is specifically intended for pages which contain apparently non-GFDL copyright material for which a User has claimed copyright or permission(s). Initial listings of pages with suspected copyright problems should not be listed in this section. When placing items here, please post under the relevant month (eg. if the copyvio listing was first made in October 2005, please post it there). If you are a Wikipedia editor or administrator following up on a copyright problem, please place a note under the relevant listing, stating what you have done or plan to do; this will help prevent duplicated efforts at resolving the problem.

August 2005

September 2005

  • Coalition for the Prevention of Alcohol Problems from [5] This link is Broken 02:10, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Author claims ownership on talk page. -Splashtalk 17:14, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Tarrazu from [6] Shanes 21:15, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Permission on talk page needs followup. -Splashtalk 17:14, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Daron Hagen From [7]
    • Talk: page claims to be authorised. -Splashtalk 21:22, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Walter Hartley from [8], as helpfully noted at the end of the article. —Cryptic (talk) 11:41, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Talk page claims permission. Need followup. -Splashtalk 22:39, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Christopher Willits copied from [9], direct cut and paste. - CHAIRBOY () 19:42, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Talk page claims permission. -Splashtalk 00:22, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Buttigieg De Piro from [10]. Angela. 06:02, September 2, 2005 (UTC)
    • Claim on talk page that he's the original author. --Delirium 02:38, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Golden City from [11] Owen× 15:58, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Permission claim on talk page. --Delirium 02:38, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Matt Hanson copied from [12] as indicated in cretion edit summary. Site says "Copyright © 2003 RotoVision SA". DES (talk) 17:37, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Claim on talk page that it's not a copyvio. --Delirium 02:38, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Paryushana from here. Phroziac (talk) 15:46, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
    • This is my blog. I own the copyright for it. That is why I posted the contents in wikipedia.Is there anything I have to do to make my article in wikipedia visible?
  • KTOON is pasted from [13]. Brighterorange 19:57, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Hello to everyone, I am the KToon director project and i am interested in to clarify that Toonka Films is really interested in to promoting the KToon Website. So, anyone is allowed to copy and paste in the wikipedia the text which we did put in our official website. Please, remove the infringement announcement and let that more people know about our project. Thank you. Gustavo Gonzalez / ktoon at
  • Atlanta_International_School from [14] - R Lee E (talk, contribs) 23:27, September 3, 2005 (UTC)
  • Unverified permission on talk page. RedWolf 06:00, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Its unclear why this was deleted, I have contated the deleting admin to figure out why. --best, kevin ···Kzollman | Talk··· 00:28, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
I have copyright permission for Demarest Hall, I live with Enon Avital, the creator of the webpage, it's fine, email him here:
Or and who I both work with as Culture Studies leader of Demarest Hall.(preceding unsigned comment by Brizimm (talk • contribs) 21:32, September 10, 2005)
  • This article is my original work J. Rock I am authorized to report on this group. The article in question was released by me to various newsgroups, music resources. Feel free to contact me at, or the group directly to verify this. The original article is located here [19] This is twice I have posted material on OUTTALINE and this infringing claim is total nonsense, and annoying. So as stated in the talk page for OUTTALINE I will not post material here anymore. I thought this was a reference source for accurate information. The first post was on the percussionist Lightning Strikes, which also ended up in a total fiasco here. People should actually check for original sources instead of just running rampant here????
Initial article information provided by webmaster (c)2005. Use Contact Form on Website to verify, if necessary.
Initial article information provided by webmaster (c)2005. Use Contact Form on Website to verify, if necessary.
I own the copyright for the text on this website and give permission for its use. Webadmin, Virgo Consortium -
  • Wildflower_-_A_triathlon_documentary_film from [30] --PhilipO 17:11, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Talk page asserts ownership. -Splashtalk 23:26, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Impaled (band) from [31] (and other places). User:Zoe|(talk) 22:31, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Talk page gives permission. -Splashtalk 23:31, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Shadhiliya from [ User:Zoe|(talk) 23:36, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Talk page claims permission from owner. -Splashtalk 23:31, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
  • All images contributions by Jbc01 (talk • contribs). User is submitting pornographic BDSM images and claims to have the permissions of a specific publishing company to release these under the GFDL. Clearly someone should follow up on this, but I don't have the stomach to do it myself right now. Dragons flight 13:27, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Chip Clothier (history · last edit) from [32]. --Woohookitty 10:49, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Ownership asserted on talk: -Splashtalk 18:32, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Green Gel Records (history · last edit) - couldn't find this on Google, but it seems extremely unlikely to be original work - I mean, look at this: If we can still hope for more of his imaginative guitar work, this critic will be pleased. splintax (talk) 14:01, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Green Gel Records and Willard (band) Because, one cannot Google a topic, one should think that it is possibly not original work? I believe that the contrary is the case. Green Gel Records is a defunct lable, of which I am still the copyright holder. I wrote this article. The FACTS are genuine. I would gladly remove the line that Splintax has a problem with. I am sorry that I added an opinion to the article. It can be remedied quite easily. Otherwise the article only states TRUTH and FACT. I was there. I am probably a better source of information than the person who wrote the Willard artice. It could not be Googled, because it was not a lable that tried to promote itself. As my article states, it was only a vehicle (mainly for O'Neill) to simply publish music in the most amature sense. Green Gel Records and Jerry O'Neill are one and the same. If one manufactures a record that is completely self financed, one must give the "label" a name, regardless if it is known by 5 or 1000 individuals. Of course there will be no mention of it on the internet. Regardsless of it's modest status, pains were taken to insure that the coprights would be in place from the begining onward. By the by, until this matter is resolved, I contest any mention of the Green Gel Willard EP. (Mark Spiders was born Mark Shropshire, in Auburn, Washington USA) 17:25, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
Talk page is apparently telling the truth: copyright holder mentioned contributing that article when I contacted him regarding the similar case of Asrar-i Shari'at. Haeleth 20:07, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

October 2005
Someone with an IP address very similar to that of the article creator says that the University of Central Arkansas Honors College releases the information for Wikipedia to use (see Talk page). NatusRoma 02:34, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Talk page claims ownership. -Splashtalk 22:50, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Talk page claims ownership and release (makes this yucky vanity). -Splashtalk 22:50, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Fair use claims needing a second opinion

Suspected copyright infringements without online source

These need a thorough check for online sources, and if none are found, a check for offline sources.

  • Women's healthcare in 20th century China has that certain scent to it - it's the in-text citations and the slanted quotation marks around “China” that give it away for me... could be someone's paper for school. -- BDAbramson talk 04:14, 2005 May 19 (UTC)
  • Italian exports and Islam in Italy all smell like copyvios but I can't tell where from. They were all put up by User:, and share the same writing style. Dave6 05:44, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
    • No copyvio notices on these articles. -- Infrogmation 14:21, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)
    • I agree that these are almost certainly copyright violations, although they might be school papers this guy wrote. I can't find the sources either. – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 15:55, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)
  • Listed by User:Denni on VfD: The articles Sardinian (horse), Salerno (horse), Pleven (horse), and Russian Trotter were all posted within seven minutes of one another. They show remarkable consistency in format, almost as if they had been taken from a book on horses. A Google search for copyvio does not turn up any hits, which shows only that if these are copyvios, they are not from web resources. - Mike Rosoft 17:47, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Jacobo Arenas - This article appears to be a direct copy & paste of some (offline?) source(s), though I don't know for sure what would be the specific URL/source employed in the process.Juancarlos2004 2 July 2005 00:56 (UTC)
Additionally, the user responsible for this suspected copyvio is also behind a proven copyvio in the Manuel Marulanda article.Juancarlos2004 2 July 2005 00:55 (UTC)
  • Pentecostal Assemblies of the World - article was created fully formed (check the second edit on the history). Looks suspiciously like something you'd find in a leaflet or a web page. Google couldn't find the original. See also Wikipedia:Votes for undeletion#Pentecostal Assemblies of the World. --cesarb 5 July 2005 16:06 (UTC)
  • Mary Wollstonecraft (Marriage section) "cribbed" (the original editor's characterization) from an episode of Simon Schama's History of Britain. See Wollstonecraft's Talk page for more details. (This item has also been discussed below in July 9th New Listings.) -Cate8 04:36, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
  • Donald Neilson - I haven't tagged it because I'm unsure, but it looks just a bit too polished: nothing online, but it has a crime magazine flavour to it. Tearlach 02:29, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Pletal - At least the dosage information looks like it came directly from the drug manufacturer. --cesarb 00:42, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
  • "future sonics" and future sonics is pure adspeak. The pictures are probably copyvio'd as well. - Lucky 6.9 17:53, 1 August 2005 (UTC) and RHaworth 20:52:01, 2005-08-01 (UTC)
  • Majeed Amjad — Strange first-person tone, created fully formed, sole author (FactFinder (talk • contribs)) has history of copyvios (check his user talk page). Could not find online sources on google. --cesarb 17:54, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Strep B - Text dump of a FAQ on the disease, possibly from [52]. (The site does not seem to be working at the moment.) - Mike Rosoft 14:38, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Ty Pennington - the second half of the article must be a copyvio (it sounds like a Sears ad), but I can't find from where. RADICALBENDER 23:41, August 21, 2005 (UTC)
    • I believe it was based off this, but it looks like almost all of it has been put into the new author's own words, although a few word strings are the same. -- Kjkolb 12:26, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Geographical Fugue (no URL). The author died in 1964, so this work is almost certainly still under copyright. Andy Mabbett 13:52, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Control of Legionella -- Source unknown, but copied from either a text book or essay. (Not all text is relevant to subject either) Stamford spiney 14:27, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
    • Don't know what to do with this. -Splash 19:51, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Moro Crater massacre says that it was copied from a book, though it may be out of copyright. There was an online source which was taken down because of copyright problems. Even if it is not copyrighted, I'm not sure that the content is appropriate for Wikipedia (the event itself is). Perhaps it belongs in one of the other wikimedia projects. -- Kjkolb 05:43, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Winslow Hall (from September 8 2005 listings).
    • Talk: page claims likely to be offline source -Splashtalk 04:31, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Battle of Tunis (history · last edit) This content appears to be taken from a test, or from a book passage made into a test because there are blank lines where names should be. -- Kjkolb 12:26, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Roman infantry tactics,strategy and battle formations (history · last edit) Appears to be a scan of a book, based on style and typos ("common and powerfula pf heavy infantry", etc.) --A D Monroe III 00:36, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Please go to the page and read the talk section. It is written by someone in the Wikipedia, who does not speak english so well but who is an expert on this stuff.--Msoos 08:20, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Rev George Bourne (1780-1845) is very suspicious. It is an extremely long article created in a single post and is completely unlinked. There are lots of quotations, but it's not always clear if a person is being quoted or if the poster is attributing the text to someone else. -- Kjkolb 11:37, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
  • The Sign and the Seal (history · last edit) seems to be an opinion piece by Gil Kezwer, but searching on Google yields nothing (see talk:The Sign and the Seal for more information). Wikiacc (talk) 20:16, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure about these, but they're awfully suspect. Ahmad ibn Tulun (history · last edit) and Mosque of Amr (history · last edit). Both by the same author. Both had "By A.I MAKKI" at the top of the article. I was unable to locate online sources for either of these articles, but searching for "By A.I MAKKI" returns a ton of hits, such as [54] and [55], suggesting that the legitimate author is a writer somewhere, and that these works are copied. I didn't place the copyvio notice on the pages since I can't find a source, but if anyone else is able to come up with anything, feel free to add the notice. —Brim
  • Dragana Mirkovic - Looks like a newspaper/magazine article. All the text except the discography was created in one edit. (Google search finds nothing.) - Mike Rosoft 20:54, 28 October 2005 (UTC)


  • Image:MaxStirnerPhoto.JPG from [56] Nixdorf 18:42, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
    • This is circa 1844. RJII 19:30, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
    • No, image text claims to portray Kurt W. Fleming who is alive today. (And the director of Max Stirner archive, who has a homepage here [57].) The image is a joke, created not many years from now and copyrighted. Nixdorf 22:04, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
      • It looks like Fleming doctored himself into the photograph. However, Fleming is doctored back out and only the part of the photo with Stirner in it is there. The photo appears to be extremely old, so I doubt it's protected by copyright. RJII 20:18, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Image:Amylindsay.jpg (history · last edit) from [58]; I believe the original poster may screenshotted the image from this page. However, the result is a 4.5% reduction of the image I refer to above; I think this is walking on very thin ice when it comes to a screen shot. If the screen shot showed the website's layout or function, it would make sense. This is using screenshot to justify taking a copyrighted image. In fact, the image as it is here on Wikipedia retains the copyright tag. I also cite [59]; "Example of inappropriate use: ...substantial elements of a copyrighted material". This is the virtually the entire photograph, which is copyrighted by the operators of the site. --Durin 20:43, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Gary Dunham (history · last edit) from [60]. Mateo SA | talk 22:10, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
    • I do not consider this close enough to be a copyvio. I've found what I think was the page you meant(although the URL given doesn't work), and it's similar, but not identical. Facts cannot be copyrighted. JesseW, the juggling janitor 20:59, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Ash Grunwald from [61]. Thue | talk 09:46, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Since the source is explicitly labeled a "press kit" I sent a varient of our standard permission request to the contact addresses provide, asking if they would release this under the GFDL. I will post any response I recieve. DES (talk) 19:10, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Wilhelm Sponneck (history · last edit) and Hans Graf von Sponeck (history · last edit), from [62]. These articles have been extensively modified and some portions appear to be original, but some sentences are exactly the same as the source. -- Kjkolb 13:34, 9 October 2005 (UTC)


Idleguy's listings of SlimVirgin's uploads
  • Image:Covance Undercover 2.jpeg (history · last edit) from [63]. Idleguy 06:16, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Keep - this seems to me to be a valid fair use of the image. – Quadell (talk) 13:36, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Keep - This is probably PD because it was taken undercover, and most such images are released into the public domain. I'm in the process of trying confirm that. Claiming fair use in the meantime, because it has no commercial value and such images can't be found elsewhere. SlimVirgin (talk) 17:07, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Image:Gestcrate01.jpg (history · last edit) from [64]. Idleguy 06:16, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Keep - I've written to the website to try to track down who, if anyone, owns this. I believe it's PD but will need longer than seven days to determine that for sure. In the meantime, I'm claiming fair use because it cant be reproduce and has no commercial value. SlimVirgin (talk) 16:55, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Image:Marmoset2.jpg (history · last edit) from [65]. Idleguy 06:16, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Valid fair use. – Quadell (talk) 16:35, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
    • 'Keep - this was taken undercover inside either HLS or Covance, and is almost certainly PD. I'm in the process of checking that. It has no commercial value and there is no other way to obtain a similar image. It may take me longer than seven days to determine whether it's PD. SlimVirgin (talk) 16:55, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Image:Barbarash.jpg (history · last edit) from [67]. Idleguy 06:16, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Keep - I've contacted Barbarash to ask if we can use this under a free licence. I have no reason to believe he would object, because it's widely available and has no commercial value. SlimVirgin (talk) 16:55, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Image:KeithMann.jpg (history · last edit) from [70]. Idleguy 06:16, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Keep Keith Mann is in jail, so it's going to take some time to contact him. However, I'm as certain as I can be that this image was released as PD. I'm claiming fair use because it has no commercial value, is widely available, and is being used for educational purposes. SlimVirgin (talk) 16:55, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Image:Ryder.jpg (history · last edit) from [73]. Idleguy 07:10, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Keep - I'm having difficulty tracking Dr. Ryder down because he has retired. Will keep on trying. This is an old, poor quality photograph of no commercial value, but he is a prominent figure in British psychology regarding the psychology of animals. The article and photograph have educatonal value. SlimVirgin (talk) 16:55, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Image:DavidIcke4.jpg (history · last edit) from [74]. Idleguy 07:10, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Keep - Icke will probably not allow us to use this under a free licence, because he doesn't like the article we've written about him, so there's no point in asking. I would like to claim fair use because he's a newsworthy and controversial figure, and the photograph has no commercial value. It's possible that he is not the copyright owner, so I will try to find out who is, but in the meantime, I'd like to continue to claim fair use. SlimVirgin (talk) 16:55, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Image:JihadAhmedJibril.jpg (history · last edit) from [75]. Idleguy 07:10, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Keep - Jibril is a Palestinian leader, widely regarded as a terrorist. This image is almost certainly owned by his group, the PFLP-GC, as they are very careful about who they allow to photograph him. I have no fast way of contacting them, don't particularly want to contact them, and they'd think I was nuts if I wrote to ask about free licences. This is clearly fair use. SlimVirgin (talk) 16:55, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Image:Picadillyline.jpg (history · last edit) from [78]. Idleguy 07:10, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Keep - I think we can claim fair use for this. Copyright is held by ABC News, and they will not release it under a free licence. However, it was widely used after the July 7 London bombings. I can write to them to ask their view about Wikipedia using it. SlimVirgin (talk) 16:55, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Keep - I believe Reynolds knows we're using this. I'll write to ask her whether she'll allow us to use it under a free licence. As with the others, I may need more than seven days to determine this, because people don't always get back to me straightaway. SlimVirgin (talk) 16:55, 19 October 2005 (UTC)


  • Image:SGstory Maria2.jpg (history · last edit) from [80]. Copyright Act (Cap. 63 s 212) of Singapore states that "copyright subsisting in such a photograph... shall continue to subsist until the expiration of 70 years after the expiration of the calendar year in which the photograph was taken." (The photograph was taken on or around 11 December, 1950.) Plastictv 09:04, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Image:SGstory Maria.gif (history · last edit) from [81]. Copyright Act (Cap. 63 s 212) of Singapore states that "copyright subsisting in such a photograph... shall continue to subsist until the expiration of 70 years after the expiration of the calendar year in which the photograph was taken." (The photograph was taken some time between April and December 1950.) Plastictv 09:04, 21 October 2005 (UTC)





  • Image:Fucking austria small.jpg (history · last edit) from [97]. SCEhardt 03:31, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
    its not a copyvio... its used with permission from they authorized its use.  ALKIVAR 19:29, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
    I am concerned that the image is not actually owned by Snopes. For example, they don't seem to own the other photo used in their article. Does Snopes claim to own the copyright to the photo, or did they just say you could make a copy of a copy? -SCEhardt 21:54, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
    They did not claim to be creators, but to be honest I never asked whether they originated the image, at the time It was the only picture on their page and I assumed it was an original. So I guess it could still be a copyvio by :/ sorry...  ALKIVAR 21:11, 27 October 2005 (UTC)


  • Mrs Beeton (history · last edit) from [104]. Ben-w 00:01, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
    • I don't see any evidence that existed before before 22 September 2005, when the link was added to Wikipedia. According to Google, we are the only site that links to is Wikipedia. Looking at the history, this page evolved into its current form. All indications point to copying from us.--Prosfilaes 00:57, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Image:29th century starfleet.jpg (history · last edit) from [105]. — THOR =/\= 01:25, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Image:Bernhard.jpg - this is a recent picture of Dutch royalty. I do not think this can be PD as stated. No source is given, the uploader has not done edits since a year, so I cannot ask him about it. Ellywa 05:38, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
User Michael Dorosh says - this is not a copyright violation; I am the webmaster and author of the page this was ported from; I was editing the page for formatting when wikipedia flagged it as a violation. Copyright resides with me and I wanted to add some of our content to Wikipedia. I can be contacted at 22:15, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
    • I've sent an email asking for confirmation of permission, and added this item to the "Poster claims permission" section above. Does anything happen to this item here? Red Robot 06:44, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
    • The email address matched the one on the site. Confirmation of permission request sent, received back and forwarded to PR department. Reverted article to pre-copyio version and flagged talk page. --GraemeL (talk) 14:02, 28 October 2005 (UTC)


  • ConCarolinas (history · last edit) from [121], sentences have been moved around. -- Kjkolb 00:04, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
    I've received permission from the ConCarolinas webmaster and chairman (Ron McClung) to use the original ConCarolinas article's material, but since I've already created a temporary article with better hypertext links, I would prefer that the original (non-hyperlinked) article be deleted and the temporary article become the primary. Thanks. -- Vorticity 10:25, 2 November 2005 (Eastern Time)


Keep -- I've exchanged email with someone at Sri Chinmoy Centre who is involved in their web publishing. I believe a permission will soon be emailed to There seems to be goodwill to do this, and I got a strong sense that a copyright complaint is unlikely. I'm removing the Copyvio banner with the expectation that this matter will soon be resolved, and that the banner is overkill. I will monitor and post a follow-up. Thank you. --Fencingchamp 13:01, 31 October 2005 (UTC)


  • Image:Lunginsewer.jpg (history · last edit) from [128]. Image page claims "Keith Kostman, no rights reserved" but neither the image page nor the source explains who Keith Kostman is (the photo itself is from a film by Mike Etoll). The source does not include a copyright statement, which is not the same thing as "no rights reserved." -- Gyrofrog (talk) 03:23, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Actually the edit history says "Keith Kostman. I took this photo during th sewerbaby shoot and reserve no rights to it. It is free to all..." This should be in the image page but shouldn't it also be verified some way? Left notes at uploader's talk page. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 03:34, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
      • Uploader has since attributed two other websites as the source, in all cases claiming to be the creator/owner and that he is releasing image to public domain. But none of these sources say anything about copyright, licensing etc. (Personally, I think it's safe to assume that the uploader really is the creator/owner. FWIW.) -- Gyrofrog (talk) 00:23, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Template:Chinese zodiac - the 12 articles stemming from this template all seem to contain copy-and-pasted text from various websites. Sorry but I wasn't sure what to do with these articles, they are a mess. Rampart 04:02, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
    The individual links, if they are suspected copyvios, need to be listed separately here. If all are deleted, then the template could be listed on WP:TFD. RedWolf 05:54, 7 November 2005 (UTC)


  • Arthur Lichte (history · last edit) from [132]. Text was rearranged in the article, but still plagiarizes. Text is originally from a USAF site and is a work of thr federal goverment and therefore in the public domain.  Denelson83  21:37, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

New Listings


* {{subst:article-cv|PageName}} from [source]. ~~~~

After the removal of one batch of copyvio text, what was left was still suspect. I have taken out all dubious text and left a smaller article based on the Cath Enc.Staffelde 00:56, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

I made a very silly mistake, and may have posted copyright information, so therefore want it removed as soon as possible, please delete this page:


* {{subst:article-cv|PageName}} from [source]. ~~~~

In response to your concern for possible illegal copyright use, we would like to inform you that we are legal owners of Betisa LLC- For this reason we would like your permission to allow our article within your site. If there are any further concerns, please feel free to contact the owner Ms. Hernandez at 1-866-976-2300 at your convenience or via email Copied from Talk Page. Will remove copyvio notice--JJay 18:28, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Sincerely, Arvin Pasamba


* {{subst:article-cv|PageName}} from [source]. ~~~~

To Adminstrator: This is not a copyright violation. I was informed by our staffer that my bio was placed in Wikipedia. Thank you for such diligence. I am the owner of the copyright. Arthur Prieston -- 05:48, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Note to the administrator reading this: the article's creator has now written a non-copyvio text (The Fight/Temp). This issue seems to be solved. Aecis praatpaal 23:04, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Craig Anton (history · last edit) from [278] Leithp 21:46, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
    • Keep. I don't believe this is a copyvio; from examination of the web site cited, it is apparent that the text was copied from Wikipedia (possibly multiple articles or deleted edits), not vice versa. MCB 18:46, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
    • I've removed this after MCB's comments above. Leithp (talk) 08:31, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
  • B. R. Ambedkar--In the long form of this section [[279]] of the article, advocated by some users, over 300 words are copied verbatim from (for example) [280] or [281]. I don't know the copyright status of this text, but it is recent enough (1956) that it could easily still be under copyright. It would be good if someone w/ an authoritative view on WP copyright policy would comment here [[282]] TIA--FRS 23:19, 3 November 2005 (UTC)


* {{subst:article-cv|PageName}} from [source]. ~~~~

Confirmation of permission notice sent to the company, reply received and forwarded to the Foundation. copyvio tag removed from the article and talk page flagged with {{confirmation}}. --GraemeL (talk) 16:17, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
I'm reverting the copyvio notice based on claim of permission. See talk page. --JJay 02:44, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Image:Vaucanson duck.jpg (history · last edit) from [311]. 19:35, 4 November 2005 (UTC) The image in question appears under "major dossiers." While it may have been created from an "archival photograph" it seems unlikely that any such photo was taken by Vaucanson in the 16th century, or that the border, white background, or shadow were added during that era.

All of these images were lifted from my website without permission! There are many more, how can I clear this up? Who is this Husnok?(Rokats)


* {{subst:article-cv|PageName}} from [source]. ~~~~


* {{subst:article-cv|PageName}} from [source]. ~~~~

* Author claims permission based on the following email I received- I am brand new to Wikipedia and while doing a search noticed that Nazarene Bible College did not have a page. So, I created one and then received the notice of copyright concern. The material did indeed come from the NBC Website. However, I am the one who developed the website and created that material. What do I need to do to acknowledge approval to post this on Wikipedia. I necessary, I can also redo the Wikipedia page.- Should I now remove the copyvio notice? --JJay 04:18, 7 November 2005 (UTC)


* {{subst:article-cv|PageName}} from [source]. ~~~~


* {{subst:article-cv|PageName}} from [source]. ~~~~


* {{subst:article-cv|PageName}} from [source]. ~~~~


Wikipedia's current date is November 9, 2005. Before appending new notices, please make sure that you are adding them under the right date header. If the header for today's date has not yet been created, please add it yourself: Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2005 November 9

Personal tools