Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations

Jack1956

• Jack1956 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
• Check requested by MrLinkinPark333 (talk)
• I came across this user while examing the close paraphrase tag at William Perry Fogg. I can confirm that the majority of this article closely paraphrases and copies Encyclopedia of Cleveland History. This close parahprasing occured when the user created the article in June 2019 and is in the current revision of the article. I decided to look at this user's current edits to see if there were any vios. I found the following:

• October 2024: Auguste Charles Valadier copies/closely paraphrases this Sage journal article. Per UK copyright and Commons:Hirtle chart, the copyright was restored in the USA during 1996. This Sage article from 1974 did not become public domain then because UK copyright is 70 years PMA.
• February 2024: Upon creation, Arthur Moreland (artist) closely copies the Political Cartoon Gallery source.
• June 2023: The creation of Clive Gardiner closely copies Artists in Britain Since 1945
• January 2023: Two edits at William Bradbury (printer) are copied from ODNB. The online version predates these edits as it's from 2021.
• Alternatively, I've found unattributed PD copying added in May 2023 at The Prince and the Beggar Maid (play) from a 1910 article. Laetitia Withall has unattributed Wikipedia copying added in January 2020 that originated from Selina Martin in Martins' 2011 article creation. I am concerned that this long-time user has made multiple recent copyvios. I believe that a CCI is needed. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. Thank you! MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 02:05, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Wow! I feel like I'm on trial here! It is my intention to answer each allegation/accusation point by point, when I have the time. In my defence, when writing my articles I regularly check them with Wiki's copyvio tools. Jack1956 (talk) 21:31, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

William Perry Fogg - the copyvios appear to have been written by an Anon IP at the same time I was constructing the article in its early stages. Jack1956 (talk) 21:37, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Auguste Charles Valadier - I cannot see where the supposed copyvios are in the article.

Arthur Moreland (artist) - the disputed section is a list of his publications; you can't copyright a list of someone's works.

Clive Gardiner - the article as it stands bears no resemblance to the alleged source, which was used only in the early stages of writing the article as a template for a complete rewording.

William Bradbury (printer) - the article bears no similarity to the ODNB article. I've run various copyvio checks on it.

The Prince and the Beggar Maid (play) - the (out of copyright) source from 1910 is fully attributed in the references Jack1956 (talk) 22:28, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Here is my reasoning:

• Fogg: The IP did not introduce the copyvio. This IP editor added references on June 6th. The copyvio originated when you created the article on June 5th.
• Valadier: Please compare the paragraph with page 786.
• Moreland: The entire source is copied and follows the same structure. Examples of copying/close para are "striking caricature the newspaper’s executive Ernest Parke was seen by Parke who, instead of sacking Moreland appointed him to the art department" and "contributed to the Liberal landslide of 1906 and the revival of Liberalism."
• Gardner: I request that you re-examine page 463 of Artists in Britain Since 1945. The last paragraph closely paraphrases/copies and follows the exact same order of the encyclopedia entry. It is also still in the current revision.
• Bradbury: Earwig copyright check does not work on sources that are hidden by subscriptions.
• Prince and the Beggar: Any Public domain copying needs Template:Source-attribution.

I think another user should examine these revisions as there is a disagreement. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:06, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

I am taking a look at these, and I'll comment one by one.

• Fogg. I don't think there was a significant close paraphrasing problem as of today, but I've modified the text to be sure.
• Valadier. I'm not sure what copyvios are being asserted. Which paragraph on p. 786, and which text in the article? If you think it is too closely paraphrased, by all means, modify it.
• Moreland. I do not think that "his striking caricature of the newspaper’s executive Ernest Parke was seen by Parke who, instead of sacking Moreland appointed him to the art department" is too closely paraphrased from the source's "A vivid caricature drawn by Moreland of Ernest Parke, then an executive on the paper, found its way to its subject and, rather than being dismissed, Moreland found himself appointed to the art staff." Again, I don't think there was significant close paraphrasing in our article, but I tweaked the text.
• Gardner. My goodness, that is nothing like close paraphrasing. I must say that one has to work extremely hard to find the few words of that profile spread out among the paragraphs of this biography. When you merely state facts that are derived from a source, it is not close paraphrasing. For example, the name of the schools that he attended have to come from one source or another.
• Bradbury. Same
• Prince. What text from this PD source do you think is unattributed?

Overall, I don't see anything concerning here. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:59, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

• Valadier: This paragraph in comparison to the first two paragraphs of the Sage Journal page 786.
• Gardner: An almost word for word copy is "Under the influence of Puvis de Chavannes he had shown for several years at the Royal Academy and the New English Art Club." The part in bold is the most concerning part. Examples of close paraphrasing is "Turning to illustration, he provided artwork for books written by his father as well as taking up portrait painting and designing posters".
• Bradbury: Example of close paraphrasing is "where eventually their business occupied the whole street and where they installed a newly-designed large, steam-driven cylinder printing press which they kept running twenty-four hours a day six days a week."
• Prince: The production and synopis pagrapgrahs. Please see the Earwig report.

MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:27, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, Ssilvers, I get you and Jack have worked a lot together, but there's still issues here. Let's look at a random paragraph from the Valadier example. I've used bold text to make direct overlaps, but you'll notice quickly just how similar the overall structure of the two paragraphs is. I've underlined material that is essentially the same, but reworded slightly.

• Much of this work was done at his own expense, while his own dental technicians in his dental laboratory in Paris fashioned the dental appliances necessary for the treatment of fractures to the jaw. It was decided that in the operating theatre Valadier would require the assistance of a trained surgeon, and so Harold Gillies joined his team. It is not known how long Gillies stayed with Valadier, but it was certainly long enough to inspire in Gillies a desire to learn more about this new medical treatment (from Wiki article)
• He had provided much of the equipment largely at his own expense, and a dental laboratory in which his own technicians from Paris made the various dental appliances used in the treatment of jaw fractures. It was decided that in the operating theatre Valadier should be assisted by a medical man, and in this capacity Gillies was sent to work with him. This was Gillies' introduction to a new kind of wound, and he soon realized that they needed a special type of surgical equipement. How long Gillies remained with Valadier is not known, but the experience produced in him an intense interest and the desire to learn more about the methods of treatment. (from SAGE article)

@Jack1956 I note above that you say you regularly regularly check them with Wiki's copyvio tools; I think that may be the crux of the issue. Tools like Earwig's only pick up direct copy-paste issues, and it's easily fooled by swapping synonyms, swapping the order of clauses, or adding extra words. I think you may have accidentally trained yourself to do that. For example, treatment of jaw fractures is completely natural and concise English, that can't reasonably be said to be a copyright issues- but in the article, that's been turned into the slightly tortured treatment of fractures to the jaw. That's stopping that sentence from showing up on Earwig's tool, but it hasn't stopped the sentence from being, fundamentally, the same. (You can see that if you zoom out a little: they both follow the form of "Work done at own expense, some type of conjunction, dental technicians from Paris made dental appliances to treat jaw fractures") Looking at other article, for example, Alfred Ellis (photographer)#Legal cases, created 2023, and there's the same issue. The overall presentation of ideas is roughly identical, even if enough words have been changed that Earwig's tool can't see it. GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋 20:29, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Chongkian

• Chongkian (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
• Check requested by MrLinkinPark333 (talk)
• Came across this user when I removed copyvio from Nuclear power in Taiwan in August 2025. This copyvio originated from this user in March 2014. I decided to see if there were any copyvios from this user after 2014. Here is what I found:
• June 2018: The Political stance section added in Yao Jen-to copies/closely paraphrases The Taipei Times source.
• July 2018 revision at Ngarachamayong Culture Center copies Ocean Island Travel
• January 2019 edit at Dexing Coal Mine copies from Taipei Municipal Wuxing Elementary School
• February 2020 edit at Jiading Wetlands copies/closely paraphrases Taiwan Today
• November 2022 edit at Central Street (Taiwan) closely paraphrases this travel website
• Also noticed on their talk page that their article Underground Cable was speedy deleted for copyright in 2012.

While I'm concerned about the recent copyvios, I'm really concerned that this user has added copyvios after becoming autopatrolled in 2016. This is because Wikipedia:Autopatrolled says it is "given to prolific creators of clean articles". Unfortunately, I have found 5 copyvios/close paraphrases that came after autopatrolled was given to this user. Due to these reason, I have to request this CCI. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. Thank you! MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 22:02, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi MrLinkinPark333, I fully understand the WP:COPYVIO of Wikipedia when writing the article and I've always been trying my best not to violate that. Up to date, I have created 2,560 new articles in Wikipedia by following as much as I can all of the rules and WP:MOS of Wikipedia. As a saying says .. "The best way not to make any mistake is not to do anything. Thus, the more we do things, the more likely we may (unintentionally) create mistake." So yes, for all of the articles I have created, I first read the statements from the source and I rewrite them down in Wikipedia in my own words and understanding, without doing any direct copy+paste from the original source. That Underground Cable article was 13 years ago when I was still a newbie in Wikipedia and knew nothing about how to write properly in the platform, and thus it was deleted, and thus I learned by lesson to better myself in writing other articles in Wikipedia. So fast forward years later, I started to create more and more articles and always attach any inline citation source per WP:INCITE. And I always put in mind that I should not write anything outside the given sources/citation because we cannot write any original research in Wikipedia articles per WP:NOR, thus I only write (and paraphrase) information from the given list of references/citations of an article. And from most of the 5 articles that you pointed out, most of them you wrote closely paraphrased, thus I did what I had to do to paraphrase. But, whether it is fully paraphrase or closely paraphrase, is there any WP:MOS on that so that I know exactly what I need to change or remove? Most of the articles I created are technical articles (meaning it is full of numbers, parameters etc), in which I cannot simply remove them because those are hard facts needed for the articles. But if you think there are things need to be changed, by all means please edit that to a level where it is no longer considered direct copying or closely paraphrase as you said. I have made paraphrasing on these 5 articles below.

I have run the Earwig's Copyvio Detector tool for the 5 articles you pointed out (Copyvio search: Use search engine & Use links in page), and:

• Yao Jen-to: 27% similarity, this is because the site listed his name, almamater, birth place and latest job position. these are hard facts in which every Wikipedia articles need to have, including fulfilling every of its Wikidata's statement. The tool states Violation unlikely
• Ngarachamayong Culture Center, 0% similarity
• Dexing Coal Mine, 0% similarity
• Jiading Wetlands, 0% similarity
• Central Street (Taiwan), 2.9% similarity, pointing to the district name of the street and the year of its redevelopment, in which these 2 information are hard facts needed for Wikipedia article. The tool states Violation unlikely

Or maybe is there any better copyvio detector tools that you use to even detect the slightest closely paraphrasing in writing Wikipedia article? Chongkian (talk) 04:39, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Earwig's copyvio detector does not detect close paraphrasing, offline or scanned sources, or archive.org content. Compare Special:Diff/847671690 to During a public forum in 2013, Yao, at the time an associate professor of sociology at National Tsing Hua University, said that Taiwanese independence had lost its place in the mainstream and urged the Democratic Progressive Party to facilitate democratization in China by promoting Taiwan’s experiences in furthering democracy, freedom and human rights. from its source. This is close paraphrasing. The rest of the diffs that MrLinkinPark333 check out. WP:NOTEARWIG explains why relying solely on those results is not enough to avoid copyright issues or disprove copyright issues. The copyvio detector is a tool, it has its flaws, and it unfortunately does not disprove the copyright issues as presented here. Sennecaster (Chat) 19:13, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

The Yao Jen-to's section I have fully deleted it (just to be on a safe side), because I don't know how else to paraphrase it without losing the core hard fact meaning inside it. The other 4 articles I have fully and heavily paraphrase it. If you see my writing and paraphrasing, I always try by best to include as many as links linking to any existing Wikipedia articles (also to change the word into its synonym to match the exact title on any existing Wikipedia article), thus making it more notable and follow standard Wikipedia-style articles. So, since you said Earwig's copyvio detector does not detect close paraphrasing, then what are the other better tool to detect close paraphrasing? Or we should just simply compare it manually and decide if that is close paraphrasing or not? Because if the latter is the case (compare it manually), then it is very subjective depending on the user. Without proper MoS or tool, then there will be so many interpretation. And also, isn't that due to the WP:NOR rule, then we as editor must follow what are the facts written in the sources we cite to the article, without really giving much extra of our other ideas of writing into it? It seems like there is a 180 degrees conflict here between WP:NOR and WP:COPYVIO. And to the best of my understanding, I did exactly what I think I had to do, which is to read first the original sources and then I type them again by my own words without copy+paste the original text, but I shall maintain all of the facts/names/sequence etc mentioned in the original sources. Chongkian (talk) 02:14, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

@Chongkian - Do you happen to have any relation to Lasersharp (talk · contribs)? You both have added copyvio to Nuclear power in Taiwan, you both seem to copy from the Taipei Times, and I'm noticing some other similarities between you two. Sophisticatedevening^(talk) 14:06, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Nope, no direct relation with that editor (Lasersharp). I come across with his edits many times because he and I both like (or used) to edit many articles about Taiwan. What I know is we are both members of WikiProject Taiwan for quite some time. During most of my edit for Taiwan-related articles, I also used to encounter with other editors, such as User: Geographyinitiative, WhisperToMe, HkCaGu, ASDFGH, Vycl1994. For me personally, I usually cite these notable English online news of Taipei Times, Focus Taiwan and China Post for most of the Taiwan-related article contents in English Wikipedia. Chongkian (talk) 15:44, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

HappyHistorian1862

• HappyHistorian1862 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
• Check requested by MmeMaigret (talk)
• Close paraphrasing in at least 5 articles.

I recently reviewed this Draft:The Flamin' Oh's for AfC and declined it. I received a rather nice but odd message overnight from another user saying that they had addressed the issues and moved the article (their own) to mainspace which made me have a look at the editor's history.

They've only been on WP since the beginning of this month with 115 edits but they've have added a slew of articles to mainspace. Many of them have clean-up issues, including a number with close paraphrasing templates.

I had noticed some close paraphrasing of two or three sources in the The Flamin' Ohs article.

• The Flamin' Oh's

The band ultimately broke up in 1987 after the release of their fourth indie album "Paint the Sky".[3][9][10] The band has a star of fame on the First Avenue nightclub in Minneapolis.[11] In 1997, the Flamin' Oh's reunited for the Mill City Music Festival in Minneapolis' North Loop, which also featured musicians such as Ray Charles, Joan Jett, and B. B. King.

Star Tribune article: The Flamin Ohs Live On

They flamed out in 1987 after the release of their fourth indie album, "Paint the Sky," under the moniker the Oh's. In 1997, the Flamin' Oh's reunited for the splashy Mill City Music Fes-tival in Minneapolis' Warehouse District, which also featured Ray Charles, Joan Jett and B.B. King.

• The Flamin' Oh's

The bands keyboardist and vocalist Joseph Behrend was murdered in 1989. In the early morning of August 19, 1989 Behrend was found dead in his apartment. 36-year-old Behrend had been bludgeoned to death with his own guitar, a red Gibson Les Paul Epiphone. A suspect was arrested, but without enough evidence to charge him with murder, the case went cold.

Haunted by murder, Star Tribune:

The keyboardist for Minneapolis rock band the Flamin' Oh's, Joseph Behrend was slain in his apartment in the early morning of Aug. 19, 1989. The 36-year-old musician had been bludgeoned to death with his own guitar. A suspect was arrested, but without enough evidence to charge him, the case went cold.

Here are some others

• Lyman S. Kidder:

Kidder's 11-man patrol reached Custer’s previous campsite on the evening of July 1, 1867 but found it abandoned.[8] Unbeknownst to the command at Fort Sedgwick, Custer had left the area, scouting further south, then northwest. During the night, Kidder mistook a wagon train trail that Custer had sent to Fort Wallace for Custer’s trail. He and his men then followed the wrong path.[7]

https://www.legendsofamerica.com/kidder-massacre-kansas:

Kidder reached Custer’s campsite on the evening of July 1 but found it abandoned. Unbeknownst to Fort Sedgwick, Custer had left the area, scouting further south, then northwest. In the moonlight, Kidder mistook a wagon train trail that Custer had sent to Fort Wallace for Custer’s trail. He and his men then followed the wrong path.

• Alexander Louis Arch:

Arch received basic training at Fort Douglas before being deployed to the Mexico–United States border during the Mexican Border War where he was promoted to the rank of Corporal. Arch later served in the Pancho Villa Expedition under John J. Pershing in an attempt to capture Pancho Villa in retaliation for his Raid on Columbus in 1916. During the expedition, Arch received a promotion to the rank of Sergeant.

https://www.worldwar1centennial.org/index.php/indiana-in-wwi-stories/2420-alex-l-arch.html:

He was sent to Fort Douglas in Arizona where he received training and served along the United States Southern border with Mexico where he was promoted to the rank of corporal. He was later among the soldiers that John Pershing led into Mexico in pursuit of the paramilitary forces of Pancho Villa in an attempt to capture Villa in retaliation for his raid on Columbus New Mexico in 1916. During this expedition, Arch received a promotion to the rank of sergeant.

Indian removals in Minnesota

The Ojibwe historically stretch from present-day Ontario in eastern Canada all the way the state of Montana near the Rocky Mountains. Oral traditions of the Ojibwe, Odawa, and Potawatomi assert that at one time all three tribes were one people who lived at the Straits of Mackinac.[4]

https://www.mpm.edu/educators/wirp/nations/ojibwe/history

The Ojibwe stretch from present-day Ontario in eastern Canada all the way into Montana. Oral traditions of the Ojibwe, Ottawa, and Potawatomi assert that at one time all three tribes were one people who lived at the Straits of Mackinac.

• Joel Emmons Whitney

Whitney occupied the space above Charles D. Elfelt's business storefront from 1851 to 1867. Elfelt was a prominent Jewish textile trader and actor in Saint Paul. Whitney's gallery was later known as Whitney’s Pioneer Gallery and Whitney's Pioneer Gallery and Photographic Depot. Local newspapers from the time often refer to Whitney as being the first photographer of St. Paul.

https://www.placeography.net/Whitney's_Gallery,_3rd_Street_and_Cedar_Avenue,_Saint_Paul,_Minnesota_(Razed)

Whitney occupied the space above Charles D. Elfelt’s clothing store on 3rd and Cedar from 1851 to 1867.... Whitney was an early adopter of photography, and his gallery was later known as “Whitney’s Pioneer Gallery and Photographic Depot.” Local newspapers from Whitney’s time often refer to him as the first photographer of St. Paul.

• Draft:The Acton Incident

On Sunday, August 17, 1862, four young Dakota men of the Wahpeton band (sometimes they are stated to be Mdewakanton) were returning to the Lower Sioux Agency from hunting. Upon seeing some chicken eggs in a nest at the farm of a white settler, Robinson Jones, there was a disagreement among the Dakota whether or not to take the eggs. When one Dakota man refused, his companions dared him to prove that he was not afraid of the white man's reaction for stealing his eggs. The Dakota men proceeded to follow Robinson Jones back to his village where others White settlers were gathered.

https://www3.mnhs.org/usdakotawar/stories/history/acton-incident

On Sunday, August 17, 1862, four young Dakota men of the Wahpeton band were returning from hunting. Upon seeing some chicken eggs in a nest at the farm of a white settler, there was a disagreement whether or not to take the eggs. When one refused, his companion dared him to prove that he was not afraid of the white man's reaction. The Dakota men proceeded to engage a white man nearby, Robinson Jones. Following him to a white homestead where some white settlers were gathered.

MmeMaigret (talk) 12:43, 26 November 2025 (UTC) MmeMaigret (talk) 12:43, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

MmeMaigret,

While I try to paraphrase sources, which is not against the rules (separate from close-paraphrasing), I have never tried to directly just copy and past source information or duplicate information from webpages. As for moving articles to the mainspace, we are allowed to do so without waiting for peer edited reviewing are we not? I have been told so several times by other contributors who have reviewed my pages beforehand that experienced users can move pages forward to the mainspace as articles instead of just waiting for peers to review (which can take months). As for the supposed copyrights, I will remove the material from the pages you have suggested and remedy it by "editing the article to remove any non-free copyrighted content" as per your suggestions. Thank you. I am new to Wikipedia yes, but none of my posts have been deliberately offensive or meant any harm, I am here to share and write about history. Out of my 115 edits you have chosen 6, however, that is just 6 out of hundreds of edits I have contributed (primarily towards the field of history) before I made this formal account. Previous to that I have been editing pages since January, 2025. Thanks.

- Regards. HappyHistorian1862 (talk) 14:14, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

In the meantime, I will be editing these pages along with any other pages that have been flagged by MmeMaigret for copyright issues in order to correct my own flaws and errors. No harm was intended, just an honest historian who is still relatively new to Wikipedia looking to contribute towards historical pages. Whenever I publish or draft these pages I do not think deliberately to violate copyright laws. If you perceive that I have I sincerely apologize. Hopefully I can keep this account and keep contributing towards history, that is my goal in the end. HappyHistorian1862 (talk) 14:50, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I have since edited all the previous sentence structures which you have mentioned above. I have also remediated and removed the accused copy-paste, as well as close paraphrasing templates from the aforementioned articles as I have edited and resolved each of the pages individually via edits. Hopefully this resolves the issue and displays that I am serious about editing and correcting any mistakes I make here on WP. Thanks. HappyHistorian1862 (talk) 17:00, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

@HappyHistorian1862 You are allowed to publish your own articles once autoconfirmed but, if everyone moved their own articles after they had 10 edits, no one would wait for an Article for Creation review. What is unusual about what you did, is you that you submitted the draft for AfC and then, on it being declined, decided that you had addressed the issues and moved it to mainspace. But I don't believe you should be moving any articles to mainspace because it is pretty obvious that don't appreciate Wikipedia rules, particularly the requirement for significant coverage in reliable independent secondary sources, as evidenced by the The Flamin' Oh's article and the Draft:The Acton Incident. The latter is woefully sourced, contains bare URLs and doesn't reuse sources. Blog posts are not reliable secondary sources. For someone with so few edits (and your edit count is exaggerated by all the articles and talk pages you've moved to mainspace), your articles have far too many issues. MmeMaigret (talk) 08:30, 27 November 2025 (UTC)

You deciding that the close paraphrasing issues have been resolved and deleting the templates also concerns me because those templates alert others to possible issues and you're not necessarily the best person to determine if they've been objectively resolved. MmeMaigret (talk) 08:42, 27 November 2025 (UTC)

@Mmemaigret

Hello, this is a long overdue reply, but I have since fixed a lot of the stuff that was wrong with some of my previous early articles including the Acton Incident, Indian removals in Minnesota, Lyman S. Kidder, etc. I have since been more diligent in close paraphrasing and copywritten material(s) while drafting and submitting articles to the main space here on Wikipedia. This was one of my first major articles, so it was not as spit-polished as some of my more recent articles I have written. Wikipedia has been a "live and learn" process as a relatively new editor. Thanks. HappyHistorian1862 (talk) 18:29, 15 October 2026 (UTC)

Above seems too close to me, though I don't think this is big enough for a full case. Surveyor results below: Tenshi! (Talk page) 17:29, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

• N Indian removals in Minnesota (2 edits): (+30628)
• N Hiram P. Grant (2 edits): (+25089)
• N Sully's Expedition (1863-1864) (2 edits): (+16842)
• N William J. Cullen (1 edit): (+15365)
• N Oakland Cemetery (St. Paul, Minnesota) (2 edits): (+14807)
• N James C. Edson (2 edits): (+14094)
• N Frederick E. DuToit (2 edits): (+13030)
• N Oran D. Perry (2 edits): (+11966)
• N Joel Emmons Whitney (2 edits): (+11398)
• N Charles K. Bucknum (2 edits): (+11013)
• N The Flamin' Oh's (2 edits): (+10514)
• N 3rd Indiana Volunteers (Mexican-American War) (2 edits): (+10498)
• N Alexander Louis Arch (2 edits): (+10496)
• N Charles W. Nash (politician) (3 edits): (+9449)
• N Lyman S. Kidder (2 edits): (+9362)
• N George Carlos Whitcomb (2 edits): (+8211)
• N Josiah F. Marsh (2 edits): (+8079)
• N Acton Incident (2 edits): (+7163)
• N Draft:Harmon J.B. Miller (2 edits): (+5680)
• 5th Minnesota Infantry Regiment N
• N Draft:Big John McNeil deleted G13 MER-C 18:16, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

This report generated by ContributionSurveyor.java at 2025-11-26T17:07:03.343524757Z. Survey URL: http://wikipediatools.appspot.com/contributionsurveyor.jsp?mode=on&user=HappyHistorian1862&wiki=en.wikipedia.org&nominor=1&noreverts=1&earliest=&latest=&bytefloor=150

Wikidea

• Wikidea (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
• Check requested by Rambling Rambler (talk)
• User in question looks to have been creating for the last two decades various articles on legal cases and statute. While this is no doubt a good faith goal at providing an open--source repository of case law, they have created over 1,000 articles of which many look to be verbatim reproductions of court judgements. In the UK's various court systems they are subject to copyright under the terms of the Open Government Licence which doesn't look to have been followed (namely a failure to attribute the copyright to anyone, or link to the OGL licence terms), instead typically linking to only to a third party legal repository as a source (such as bailii.org):

Example articles of this issue (with CopyVio tool match in brackets) include:

• IWGB v CAC (95.8%)
• Torquay Hotel Co Ltd v Cousins (98.9%)
• Rookes v Barnard (95.0%)
• Ready Mixed Concrete (South East) Ltd v Minister of Pensions and National Insurance (94.5%)
• Carmichael v National Power plc (93.8%)
• Ward v Tesco Stores Ltd (69.5%)

Given that the user in question is typically the overwhelmingly predominant editor of the articles they've created I have a distinct worry that we could in effect have had a good faith user create hundreds of articles that are fundamentally copyright violations in their entirety, so filing this to get a more experienced perspective on this. Rambling Rambler (talk) 15:14, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

No, there's no copyright on a UK court judgment, and it's (obviously) fair use anyway. I remember a discussion about this many years ago. The confusion is that reporting companies have copyrights over their version of the report, but in fact it's just the headnote (which summarises the judgment) which is different. The judgments themselves can be used by anyone. That's what you see in all the casebooks, etc. Authors never have to request permission for doing this when they write books extracting judgments. Hope that makes sense, and it helps.

I would appreciate, however, being politely asked what the correct position is, rather than (baselessly) being accused of copyright violation, and I would appreciate if the user above withdraws all the notices they've put up.

You can also read some explanation of copyright rules on the Bailii website: https://www.bailii.org/bailii/copyright.html

As with many things in common law, there's actually not much clarity over who owns a copyright (if any) on a judgment - there seem to be various potential views - a court, the judge themselves, or none - but in practice as I say, there's absolutely no problem in reproducing it free. Wikidea 06:12, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

So first off, the BAILLI link explicitly states they are under copyright:

”In the case of United Kingdom judgments and legislation, BAILII's understanding is that Crown copyright protected material (other than the Royal Arms and departmental or agency logos) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium provided it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context, and provided that where any of the Crown copyright items on this site are being republished or copied to others, the source of the material is identified and the copyright status acknowledged.”

Also a quick google for extra information revealed that the government have seemingly threatened legal action in at least one case over copyright.

And it’s not “obviously fair use” to reproduce it in its near entirety without attribution.

Finally to be quite honest the reason I filed this here rather than asking you directly because you’ve got years of copyright concerns on your talk page/archive. Rambling Rambler (talk) 10:57, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

@Rambling Rambler: "government have seemingly threatened legal action in at least one case" -- for the record, that's not actually what the reference says. The Government (specifically the MoJ) said it had no problem. It was BAILII who were unhappy -- because the MoJ appeared to be encouraging mass-downloading from BAILII (against the sites Terms of Use); and also ignoring perhaps copyrights claimed by BAILII in its HTML conversion. Will consider this further in the WT:Copyrights thread. Jheald (talk) 00:05, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

@Jheald yeah, reading it again seems I crossed wires. If anything I think I actually left an issue out because not only does the source add dimension in supporting that judgements are subject to copyright under OGL, but then actually it seems BAILLI themselves take stronger issue with reuse of material they host than we previously thought. Rambling Rambler (talk) 00:44, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Reviving this, as similar issues with BAILLI have come up again. Following the view expressed here by one lawyer I think this once again highlights the serious concerns I have about what appears to be routine breaches of copyright laws when it comes to UK legal judgements. Rambling Rambler (talk) 13:33, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Durindaljb

• Durindaljb (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
• Check requested by Sophisticatedevening^(talk)
• I Came across this user after they created Frederick DeField earlier today. The majority of the page turned out to be taken from . I decided to look at more of their contributions and found they added more copyvio to Vergennes, Illinois from . Looking further back at their talk page they also seem to have been taking unattributed PD-USGOV content here. Going back even further to 2018 User talk:Durindaljb#Speedy deletion nomination of Herbert E. Meyer they had a G12 on Herbert E. Meyer apparently. In September last year Dclemens1971 gave them a warning after they copied in Draft:John Christopher Zander from . And again in Pete Adkins from https://mosportshalloffame.com/inductees/pete-adkins/.... And again in The Cash-Book Journal from . I believe that with 4,000+ edits this is a large enough issue that a CCI is needed, and likely a mainspace block as well. Sophisticatedevening^(talk) 02:38, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Maykiwi

• Maykiwi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
• Check requested by theleekycauldron (talk • she/her)
• Near-wholesale copying in these edits to Streets of Minneapolis (see source). User has received warnings on their talk page in October 2021, January 2025, August 2025, and October 2025 and has generally only engaged combatively. They seem to make lots of large edits in AP2, so a larger examination might be needed. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 14:29, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

  Greetings. What is AP2? Thanks. Maykiwi (talk) 22:08, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

  @Maykiwi, American politics, post 1992. AP2 is the shortcut of the Arbitration Case. Sennecaster (Chat) 22:12, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

  Greetings. Regarding that edit, in the moment I couldn't find words to succinctly describe the video other than the succinct paragraph provided by the article. Would letting it intact and putting it between quotation marks work? It's always hard to balance between copyright violation and original research. Thanks. Maykiwi (talk) 22:28, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

  Just now taking a look at this request. @Maykiwi: Your response here and at User talk:Maykiwi#October 2025 doesn't inspire much confidence in your understanding of what you've done wrong. Copying and pasting copyrighted content is not allowed even if the content is published publicly, because it is still copyrighted. Ripping a paragraph off of a source and adding quotation marks at the start and end wouldn't fix the problem; that's not quoting, that's trying to use a loophole that doesn't exist.

  In regard to your last sentence, original research is adding information without sources, so I don't see the relevance of it here. The "in-between" is writing content in your own words and citing sources; they are not mutually exclusive like you're implying with your responses.

  I also see that you LLM-generated a talk page response back in June, so I'm not sure if you're using LLMs in your other responses as well.

  @Theleekycauldron: No decision from me on if a full investigation is needed, but I did take a look and not a lot of Maykiwi's recent edits (as in July; they haven't edited since July) have been adding (potentially problematic) content. The edits are pretty stale at this point as well. Yue🌙 (talk) 08:13, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

Camilasdandelions

• Camilasdandelions (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
• Check requested by Zzz plant (talk)
• Potential close-paraphrasing has been found in several articles, either already GA-status or GA-nominated. Two are documented in recent GANs: first, one reviewed by Pi.1415926535 and one reviewed by me:

  −

  Source: In the song, Ava is heard singing "She samples, singing Gaga imitations/ Can't kings and queens look good with poker faces?". The line not only makes reference to her own hit song ‘Kings And Queens’, but also the breakthrough Lady Gaga hit ‘Poker Face’. She continues in the song, brushing off the criticism: "But I'm loving myself even if you hate it." According to a report from Rolling Stone, a source close to Ava Max has confirmed that the leaked snippet is real and is taken from the title track to her new album ‘Don't Click Play’.

  +

  Article: In the song, Max is heard singing "She samples, singing Gaga imitations/ Can't kings and queens look good with poker faces?". The line not only makes reference to her own hit song "Kings & Queens", but also the breakthrough Lady Gaga hit "Poker Face". She continues in the song, brushing off the criticism: "But I'm loving myself even if you hate it". According to a report from Rolling Stone, a source close to Max confirmed that the leaked snippet is real and is taken from the title track of her new album Don't Click Play.

  Another is documented in a GAR I recently opened. More can be found in Romance (Camila Cabello album):

  −

  Source:...Lee and Bell are already looking ahead to Cabello's next project. Bell said he imagines Cabello will work on album No. 2 during her upcoming spring tour, saying they’ll send ideas back and forth from April until June, when they'll finally be able to get into the studio together. He wants to give the second album a "more mature progression," but ultimately, the new songs will depend on Cabello.

  +

  Article:...Brian Lee and Louis Bell told MTV News that they were already looking ahead to her next project. Bell said he imagined she would work on her second album during her then-upcoming tour, saying they would send ideas back and forth from April until June, when they would finally be able to get into the studio together. He wanted to give the second album a "more mature progression," but ultimately, the new songs would depend on Cabello.

  There's also this in Aquarius (Tinashe album):

  −

  Source:"Aquarius" – "Welcome to my world," Tinashe greets at the close of the spacey title track, aptly setting the tone for the whispery soul aesthetic that characterizes much of the album. "Bet" feat. Dev Hynes – A mystical ride-or-die anthem, "Bet" brushes off haters of love and assures that Tinashe is down for the long haul: "I’ma be around for ever, always." Devonté Hynes’ (a.k.a. Blood Orange) guitar outro is an exhilarating exclamation point. "Cold Sweat" – One of the more dynamic records on Aquarius, “Cold Sweat” finds the budding rookie stepping back and observing the fake friends and overall sycophancy that comes with stardom. “Don't think I’ve forgotten who was always here,” she notes, over a beat that begins at a crawl before evolving into a pendulum of synths.

  +

  Article:The album opens with the intro "Aquarius", which features a "spacey" production with a whispery soul aesthetic, followed by "Bet" featuring Dev Hynes. "Bet" is a "mystical" with "ride-or-die" lyrics, that brushed off "haters", closing with Devonté Hynes performing a guitar outro. "Cold Sweat" is a dynamic song that sees Tinashe observing fake friends and overall sycophancy that comes with stardom. Its production "begins at a crawl before evolving into a pendulum of synths", followed by the album's first interlude titled "Nightfall".

  And although brief, overlap of unique creative phrasing in Forever Neverland also stands out to me:

  −

  Source:It's a pop album brimming with thick beats and tropical electronics

  +

  Article:Forever Neverland is a pop album brimming with thick beats and tropical electronics

  I don't think any of the above are the most severe copyright problems in the world, and all of them are fixable with careful re-writing. However, I am concerned about the overall pattern here, particularly in multiple GAs. I reached out to the contributor to explain my reasoning. Their response in the aforementioned GAR did not resolve my concerns. I take no pleasure in coming here, and would welcome other explanations from more experienced copyright patrollers, but I take the GACR seriously and feel an obligation to raise this in some forum. Zzz plant (talk) 03:02, 7 February 2026 (UTC) Zzz plant (talk) 03:02, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

  There's a thread on the AI Cleanup noticeboard about potential AI use; if that is the case, the close paraphrasing (of which there are many more examples) could be an artifact of AI source summarization. Gnomingstuff (talk) 22:07, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

  Was pblocked from mainspace. Tenshi! (Talk page) 11:06, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Galaxybeing

• Galaxybeing (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
• Check requested by 1234qwer1234qwer4
• Special:Permalink/1347965360, Special:Permalink/1347962487, Special:Permalink/1347961907 have close paraphrasing blatant enough to be picked up by copyvios.toolforge.org. Special:Permalink/1347960000 has at least one very non-trivial phrase copy-pasted essentially without changes ("quiescent evolutionary history [that is] driven primarily by internal secular evolution"), and Special:Permalink/1347957271 has at least its entire "Observations of 4C +41.17" section closely paraphrased from the abstracts of the sources cited in the respective paragraphs. It also used unmodified LaTeX markup or output prior to my change, e.g. "1\farcs8 (13 kpc), and 400\kms" and "M⊙ yr-1".

The user has previously been warned in June 2024 and subsequently blocked the next month, so this might only affect articles created until that point (or their unblock in September that year), though the block seems to have been focussing on factual accuracy (not unlikely to be introduced along with the close paraphrasing, cf. my post at Talk:4C +26.42#Disputed) and notability. 1234qwer1234qwer4 21:55, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Ok, I'm aware of close paraphrasing problems now, I've just stopped them at least a year ago and now decided to made sure to write articles in my own words. Galaxybeing (talk) 01:27, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

I've also rewritten the three previously created articles in my own words after looking at the problems and addressing the issues made. Galaxybeing (talk) 07:24, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Krips15

• Krips15 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
• Check requested by Cent58 (talk)
• Close paraphrasing and copying of materials and topics from a single forum user.

I have reason to believe that the user Krips15 is taking posts from an axishistory forum user and closely paraphrasing it to be edited into Wikipedia. I have requested a deletion of edits due to copyright violation for some of the more egregious long edits with multiple different sources that were one of the posts of the axishistory forum user with similar wording. These edits had also been copy pasted by the user into other pages such as this one, including the unrelated addition of the movie Fires on the Plain previously posted by the axishistory user here. Some other notable cases of possible plagiarisms included :

• On May 22, 2026, the axishistory user made a post "refuting" R. J. Rummel's studies on population loss. They cited two experts but claimed that Edward J. M. Rhoads "ridiculed", "mocks", and "made fun of" and Sara M. Butler "mocked" Rummel's estimates. These were their own words as the original sources cited certainly did not use such languages. When Krips15 made an edit on the R.J. Rummel page which was also put in the Democide page here, Krips15 claimed that Edward J. M. Rhoads "humiliate" and Sara M. Butler "made fun of" Rummel in their researches, which again did not appear in the original sources and seemed to be a close paraphrasing of the axishistory user’s words.
• On July 6, 2026, Krips15 made two edits in two different pages within a minute of each other, talking about how the soldiers of the Merrill's Marauders in Burma had been drinking water from a source that the Chinese soldiers used as latrine and how Chinese soldiers suffered less from intestinal diseases due to drinking boiler water and eating hot food than American soldiers and a different topic of how Chinese railway workers suffered less from dysentery then “white” American workers. The two topics were posted by the axishistory user on June 23, 2026 with the same content including the American soldier Ogbum's one quote.
• In this edit for the Senshi Sosho page on July 12, 2026, Krips15 gave four different figures for Japanese strength in Jolo with all different sources. The axishistory user had posted all these numbers through several different posts before. The "3,425" figure from Senshi Sōsho and the "3,875" figure from JACAR were present in the axishistory forum user's post on August 12, 2025. On May 4, 2026, the axishistory user posted that there were "3,900" Japanese soldiers according to the US Army with the same source as the article one of "Light but Aggressive Command" in addition to the aforementioned figures of "3,425" and "3,875" figures and the "6,030" one from the Japanese Health Ministry. Among these figure, I could not find the "3,875" from JACAR anywhere else other than the website, wikipedia (after Krips15's edit), and that axishistory user's posts.
• On July 13, 2026, Krips15 made a large-scale edit in the Imperial Japanese Army page with most of its contents also already posted by the axishistory forum previously. The one I want to highlight is the edit for "war malnutrition". The axishistory user had made a post about “war malnutrition” on June 22, 2026 here, where they quoted a Japanese passage which included sources from "支那駐屯歩兵第三聯隊戦誌" that both the axishistory user and Krips15 translated as "War Chronicle of the 3rd Infantry Regiment stationed in China" and the link to the book that the passage originated from. Krips15 copied the exact same Japanese passage down to the "204" referring to the page at the end and pasted it as a search result for the book content and then used that as a reference, resulting in the lengthy citation from the Japanese characters (which I recalled took up nearly 10,000 bytes).
• On July 31, 2026, Krips15 made several edits in different pages within a few minutes of each other, with points all made by the axishistory user in their post on the same day just before Krips15 made their edits. While the axishistory user had posted about Major Takeo Inoue’s account of Major General Tetsuzo Suzuki’s death on August 12, 2025 already referenced above, it was on the post on July 31, 2026 that the user sourced the less than "glorious" depiction of Major General Tetsuzo Suzuki’s of being "tossed around" on a donkey. Not only that, Krips15 also copied the axishistory user's exact translation of Takeo Inoue's book title "運命の岐路　－玉砕のホロ島は獰猛なモロ族の棲む南海の孤島であった－" as "The Crossroads of Fate - Jolo Island, the Island of Annihilation, Was an Isolated Island in the South Seas Inhabited by the Ferocious Moro People". In the same post, the axishistory user wrote about memoirs from Japanese soldiers such as "Record of Defeat - A Record of the Battlefield of Horo Island" and "Jolo Island War Chronicles" which included the ship Ginga Maru not being able to evacuate the remains of the Japanese dead and veteran soldier Tatsuzo Okumura’s horror experience at Jolo which were also included in Krips15 edits. What made it clear that Krips15 were plagiarizing were that while quoting the relevant Japanese passages, the axishistory user made their own English translation. "『おうい、行ってしまうのかあ、俺達も連れていって呉れえ』」" were translated to 'Hey! Are you leaving? Take us with you!' and "「第一回目の遺骨収集は終戦から十一年目の、一九五六年一月から二月にかけて行われたが、収集団が危険にさらされ一柱の収集も出来なかった。その後、六八年に五十柱、翌年千四百三十柱、そして七四年に四百五十柱を収集出来たが、丘陵地や山地では全く行なわれていないし、『当面、その計画もない』（厚生省援護局）」" were translated to "The first attempt to collect remains took place from January to February 1956, eleven years after the end of the war, but the collection team was put in danger and not a single set of remains could be recovered. Subsequently, 50 sets of remains were recovered in 1968, 1,430 the following year, and 450 in 1974, but no such collections were carried out in hilly or mountainous areas, and 'there are no plans for such collections in the immediate future' (Ministry of Health and Welfare Relief Bureau)." Both of these exact translations were copied word for word by Krips15 in their edits, with the second being particularly damning.

Krips15 also created the Cot Plieng Incident (1942) which were completely translated from the Indonesian version and its one source. However, in addition to the one inline citations, Krips15 also added forty general references of unreliable sources by Wikipedia standard including from X (formerly Twitter), Facebook, Instagram, and Youtube links and scribd and download links. In fact, all these sources were cobbled up in the axishistory user’s post on July 13, 2026. I’m not sure why Krips15 decided to copy all these unreliable references with the exact same links to the Wikipedia page when they did not even attempt to use them for the main body of the article but it does make it clear that they are just taking what the axishistory user were posting.
I have made several replies in their talk page regarding their possible plagiarism. While they had refuted my claim that the claims of the Japanese eating "their own comrades" at Zhaigongfang by them and the axishistory user were original research,, they still failed to address for the third time now about why most of the topics they edited including very obscure ones that were unrelated to the editor's main focus of WW2 Japan such as the Kokura incident, human experiments at Niigata and Nagoya, and the relationships between Chinese men and Japanese women were ones that the axishistory user already posted, or why some edits were made within twenty-four hours of the relevant axishistory posts. Instead they spent a great portion of their reply attacking me for edits which were completely unrelated to the accusation of plagiarism. Just today they made an edit in the Senshi Sosho page which included the accounts from Tsuki Suzuki and Kikue Kobayashi which were already posted by the axishistory user on November 17, 2025. I feel like the editor is now just searching through all the axishistory user’s posts to edit with the same perspective over the "unreliability" of R. J. Rummel and Senshi Sosho. Cent58 (talk) 16:45, 4 August 2026 (UTC)

There is a totality issue around the ammount of copyrighted content included in an article, see Wikipedia:Non-free content#Text, and while none of the quotes used are in themselves excessive of the works they are quoted from, when you start adding them up in Cannibalism in Asia they start becoming a significant proportion of the article. All of the quotes used could be summarised in your own words and sourced to the original works which removes the entire issue. Or, if necessary, one example could be quoted with similar reports noted as such with suitable referencing added.

Similar considerations apply to the other articles, summarising is better than quotation unless there is other option.

Krips15 (talk) 23:42, 4 August 2026 (UTC)

https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?p=2632918#p2632918

why is the forum user calling out Cent58 if Cent58 is so concerned about copyright violation of that user Krips15 (talk) 00:01, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

Could you please address the points I made regarding your possible plagiarism instead of copy pasting your reply regarding the four cases of deletion of copyright materials that I already requested previously or what issues the forum user had with my editing. Cent58 (talk) 09:39, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

"Crossroads of Fate - The Island of Jolo, where the Last Stand Was Destroyed, Was a Remote Island in the South Seas Inhabited by the Ferocious Moro People" comes out automatically in Google translate no matter which person puts it in

All the other Japanese text is from Google translate

is using google translate for titles and short quotations a copyright violation?

And your entire third point doesn't even come close to close paraphrase, its literally citing factual numbers found in the source

How is merely citing the same factual numbers found in the sources I used, 3,425, 3,875, 3,900 a "copyright violation"?

All of those numbers can be found on the sources I used on Google books or Google

Clarify now, are you accusing me of doing copyvio of Limited's posts, or copyvio of the sources (the books and articles) which I also did not do?

I have never pasted entire text from the sources and presented it as my own writing in Wikipedia article mainspace, I only once used blockquote for a large quotation, the Japanese text in the Google books search url was not pasted into the article itself.

The links on Cot Plieng Incident are external links and I never actually used them as sources from the article

The article was just translated from Indonesian wikipedia Krips15 (talk) 02:33, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

Krips15 within the last twenty four hours had just edited the Hainan Island Operation page with similar content and all the references and sources (including some archived ones) used were some that had been compiled by the same axishistory user as all the above examples on November 12, 2025. The axishistory user had also used a Japanese passage of "仮名とし、村の名も伏せる。呉亜洞さんは一九二五年七月生れ、保亭県 A 村に生れ、今もそこに暮す。少女の頃は、活発で明るく、友だちとお喋りするのが大好きだった。家事、畑仕事、数字は父母から習った。山村に学校はない。家族は父母と姉と彼女の四人だった。一六歳のとき、日本軍に徴用されて「戦地後勤服務隊」なるものに入れられ、村の近くの駐屯地へ連れて行かれた。彼女と共に村から二人の娘が連行された。姉はすでに嫁にいっていなかった。駐屯地では、まず黎族の村から収奪してきた米の選別をさせられた。よい米とくず米を分ける作業だった。六、七日たって、日本兵が山へ鳥を撃ちに行くのに同行させられた。この時、山のなかで、兵士四人に押さえられて隊長に強姦された。服を脱がそうとしたので、泣き叫ぶと、日本兵は彼女の くなった。になっていた。 219 第 9 章死の恐怖をともなう性暴力." regarding the horrific experience of Wu Yadong with Japanese troops as a search result for the book's content and using that as a reference. Krips15 in their edit used this same exact Japanese passage including the "219" at the end of the book page when referencing Wu Yadong, resulting in a very lengthy citation that was the exact same link as the one posted by the axishistory user with the exception of the domain. This is the second time now after the "war malnutrition" edit where Krips15 had used the exact same Japanese passage for a book content search as a citation as the one previously used by the axishistory user. Cent58 (talk) 09:29, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

Once again, I demand you to show me the copyright violation. I have not copied any of Limited's own written content into Hainan Island Operation. I did not copy paste the Japanese text of the book into the article itself (the text is in the url). None of this breaks Wikipedia rules Krips15 (talk) 06:07, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

Why were you suddenly and mysteriously only concerned about copyvio after another user reverted me for using a blockquote he regarded as too big on the Rummel article? You have never once investigated copyright violations before or meticulously pored over sources and other edits on WW2 related articles to make sure no copyvio was found.

All of your edits are in favor of downplaying anything that you regard as unfavorable to Japan, you change infobox results to remove Japanese deaths or change the result to disputed in cases of Japanese defeats.

You insist on keeping Rummel's blockquote after its repeatedly been pointed out that he is not a historian and has no degree in Chinese history, language or World War II. You keep unreliable disreputable sources because you like what they say while you deleted anything that you think makes Japan look bad.

There is no concensus to keep Rummel other than you, you refuse to take this to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard when that's your responsibility if you want to dispute the removal when no one else backs you. Krips15 (talk) 06:31, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

TylerBurden

• TylerBurden (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
• Check requested by 1234qwer1234qwer4
• Close paraphrasing of news sources, sometimes attributed but written in indirect speech, spanning multiple sentences and only parts of the content indicated as a quote even when other parts are similarly assembled from fragments of the source.
• Special:Diff/1364092383 entire addition closely paraphrased from given source (same content added at Special:Diff/1366654194)
• Special:Diff/1367663837 entire addition closely paraphrased from given source
• Special:Diff/1369229083 same here
• Special:Diff/1342189948 same here
• Special:Diff/1368194499 sentence starting with "In one widely reported" closely paraphrased from given source; rest of the addition seems borderline

FTR, response was given at Special:Permalink/1371580073#August 2026. 1234qwer1234qwer4 06:25, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

Diffs 1-5 were problematic, though 6 seems to be within WP:LIMITED. Spotchecking earlier diffs up to last year, I'm not finding any other issues than these diffs. Do you have anything else to show this is systemic? Tenshi! (Talk page) 17:31, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

@1234qwer1234qwer4; courtesy ping for above ^ Sennecaster (Chat) 01:40, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

I had found diffs other the six above, where the issues were less egregious, e.g. only a single sentence copied/closely paraphrased from the source but without clearly being indicated as a quote, and I was not looking too thoroughly either... 1234qwer1234qwer4 13:26, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

I count four prior warnings for copyright violations since 2024. I do not think their response here was particularly encouraging, so perhaps they could find a way to signal an intention to improve on this? Mellk (talk) 21:15, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

Postbox 2

• Postbox 2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
• Check requested by MrLinkinPark333 (talk)
• Came across this user after reviewing their Good Article Nomination of Nicolas Delamare. Per Talk:Nicolas Delamare/GA1, I found a lot of copyvios from the University of Warwick and The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought. The University of Warwick copyvios were made in the article's first edit during November 2025. Due to the huge amount of copyvios, I decided to look at this user's contributions. Here is what I found:
• On the user's talkpage, Draft:Fundamental Duties was speedy deleted for copyvio in October 2025.
• Small copyvio was added to Atul Karwal in October 2025 from Indian Masterminds.
• The last two sentences at Kate Kitagawa during the October 2025 article creation copies University of California, Berkley.
• They received a copyvio warning for Policing for children in October 2025 on their talkpage.
• A copyvio warning for Robert Reiner (scholar) was given in November 2025 on their talkpage.
• Found small copyvio added to This is For Everyone in February 2026 from Tribune India.

I am mainly concerned about the three copyvio warnings and large amount of copyvios I found in the Nicolas Delamare GAN review. I am also concerned that the copyvio has continued this year. Therefore, I believe that a CCI is needed. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. Thanks! MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:29, 6 October 2026 (UTC)

Thanks User:MrLinkinPark333 for the kind review and suggestion to undertake an investigation.

As someone who is learning and adapting, I am bound to make mistakes and any efforts to correct them are most welcome.

I request you to be pointed in making the statements. You wrote: "Due to the huge amount of copyvios". Kindly mention where exactly is this huge amount in the said article. I nominated it for a Good Article Nomination not because I have any connection with the author or any of specific interest but with the sole intention of creating really good quality articles.

The style I follow for creating articles is to refer to authentic sources, make notes from them and then write on my own. In topics such as Nicolas Delamare where the material available is very scant, the resemblance measured by technical tools may produce matches that are more than typical values though I do not create my articles in the copy- paste mode.

You may also like to check the other articles I have created (some of which have already clocked a hundred thousand views under a year).

1. Kate Kitagawa, on 26 October 2025.
2. Missing children, on 29 October 2025.
3. Rajendra Bhosale, on 30 October 2025
4. Intercreativity, on 2 November 2025
5. Atul Karwal, on 2 November 2025
6. Peter Gurney (bomb disposal expert), on 3 November 2025
7. Robert Reiner (scholar), on 7 November 2025
8. William Thomas (historian), on 10 November 2025
9. Kindness Week (Canada), on 12 November 2025
10. Nicolas Delamare, on 13 November 2025
11. S. Subramanian, on 15 January 2026
12. Abhay (Police officer) on 6 February 2026
13. Home in the World on 11 February 2026
14. Mother Mary Comes to Me on 12 February 2026
15. Something Big Is Happening on 17th February 2026
16. This is for Everyone on 18th February 2026
17. AI Security Institute on 20th February 2026
18. The 2028 Global Intelligence Crisis, on 27th February 2026
19. Hsi- Huey Liang, on 1 March 2026
20. Mafia: A Global History, on 24 March 2026
21. A Sixth of Humanity, on 24 March 2026
22. Beatrice Jauregui, on 25 August 2026
23. David Bolland, on 28 August 2026

I am in no hurry and am here to help the grand idea of Wikipedia in whatever manner I can.

I believe that the efforts of well meaning upcoming editors should not be drowned in a deluge of machine read assessments regarding copyright violations.

Kindly check the case manually also wherever possible before reaching the conclusions.

Postbox 2 (talk) 06:47, 18 October 2026 (UTC)

Hello. I provided examples of copyvio at Talk:Nicolas Delamare/GA1 prior to my cci request. The bolded parts are the copyvio/close paraphrasing in the sentences. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 06:58, 18 October 2026 (UTC)

Pls see the comment:

• A copyvio warning for Robert Reiner (scholar) was given in November 2025 on their talkpage: But my reply ".... the similarities remaining are inescapable as seventy percent of them are terms such as criminologist, policing legitimacy, etc. without which his works cannot be described. He is indeed a notable scholar and chances are high there would be more contributors soon to further improve this. Hence pls do not delete ) --Postbox 2 (talk) 16:05, 7 November 2025 (UTC) has perhaps been missed.

You did. But see what you wrote:

"Came across this user after reviewing their Good Article Nomination of Nicolas Delamare. Per Talk:Nicolas Delamare/GA1, I found a lot of copyvios from the University of Warwick and The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought. The University of Warwick copyvios were made in the article's first edit during November 2025. Due to the huge amount of copyvios, I decided to look at this user's contributions."

Which means you refer to 'huge amount' in the said article on Delamare.

Hence asked.

I checked the review you made for the Good Article nomination.

I feel I must thank you for the detailed comments first. I genuinely thank you, It is meticulous effort.

But I am confused.

See the first violation you found out: I wrote in the article "He was entrusted with inspecting financial corruption in the construction of Versailles, and was later asked to manage popular unrests following dearth in 1693, 1699-1700 and 1709.[1]"

You conclude that using 'entrusted with inspecting financial corruption in the construction of Versailles' in this sentence is copyright violation.

But how is this a copyright violation?

Is every clause in a sentence in an article copyrighted?

Postbox 2 (talk) 07:00, 18 October 2026 (UTC)

In regards to the huge amount, that is correct. I found seven sentences of copyvio in Delamare from those two sources. To me, that is a lot of copyvio in one article. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 07:13, 18 October 2026 (UTC)

No offences. I am writing with a lot of heartfelt respect. But I am confused.

See the first violation you found out: I wrote in the article "He was entrusted with inspecting financial corruption in the construction of Versailles, and was later asked to manage popular unrests following dearth in 1693, 1699-1700 and 1709.[1]"

You conclude that using 'entrusted with inspecting financial corruption in the construction of Versailles' in this sentence is copyright violation.

But how is this a copyright violation?

Is every clause in a sentence in an article copyrighted? I thought it is not so.

We do take information from articles and we cite the reference. But to steal what is essentially the author's original contribution is violating his right. When we use paragraphs and sentences or even a phrase when that has a particular originality, it is violation of their rights. I did not do any of that here. But please do correct me if I am wrong, I am a beginner and can well be wrong.Postbox 2 (talk) 07:17, 18 October 2026 (UTC)

In the Versailles sentence, the bolded first part of it is a word for word copy of the University of Warwick source. It would need to be rewritten. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 07:27, 18 October 2026 (UTC)

I will do it.

(I still feel there may not be anything of a violation here, as I have readily referenced the article and have not 'stolen' anything :). Rewriting a clause for the sake of it seems a bit comical. But all said and done, we grow by listening to well meaning seniors and hence. Thanks!) Postbox 2 (talk) 07:41, 18 October 2026 (UTC)

Mnazini

• Mnazini (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
• Check requested by Lazman321 (talk)
• I stumbled upon this user upon looking through articles that had been tagged as AI-generated since May 2025 and finding Misali Island among them. The tag links to this ANI thread, which showcases evidence of close paraphrasing among this user's contributions. Although a mainspace ban was recommended, nothing came about. Despite this evidence and multiple talk page notices warning against copyright infringement, this user has never been banned or blocked. To contribute to the evidence of Mnazini's problematic behaviors, I looked at some of their most recent contributions.
• Their most recent page creation is of Mamka of Kibosho, and looking up its one and only source, History of the Chagga People of Kilimanjaro, on the Internet Archive, and yeah, much of the article is indeed plagiarized. Just looking at the first sentence, "Of Lokila's three wives, Mamka was the first wife and never bore a child." appears in both the article and the original book.
• Furthermore, revisions to Vidunda people, Sagara people, and Zigua people are all plagiarized from an edition of The Matrilineal Peoples of Eastern Tanzania.
• I will be also starting a discussion at WP:AIN. Lazman321 (talk) 18:38, 25 October 2026 (UTC)