Talk:Retrotransposon marker

Copied content / possible copyvio
This article contains several segments that are almost or exactly word-to-word identical with ones found in the previously published scientific articles and. I've contacted the original contributor (User:Fulmar) by e-mail to ask if they're one of the authors of these articles or otherwise have permission to use the content.

The latter (Kriegs et al. 2006) article at least is licensed under a free license (CC-BY) which would permit reuse on Wikipedia, but only if accompanied by explicit attribution, which the article currently lacks.

In fact, most of the original version seems to be derived from one of these sources or the other. For comparison, I've reproduced the content of the original version and the corresponding segments from the source articles side by side below:

The last paragraph isn't copied quite as verbatim as the others, but even that shows obvious similarity. The others contain significant verbatim sections, but also many changes in phrasing and structure.

Anyway, for now I'm going to wait and see if the original contributor responds — based on his contributions, it seems quite plausible to me that he might in fact be the original copyright holder to this content. The way I see it, the original articles are already freely available online, so there's no income loss and thus no need delete this in a hurry unless someone actually complains. But if we can't confirm that we have permission to use this content, it will have to go eventually. In any case, even with permission, we do need to attribute the content properly. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 00:22, 16 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Alright. It seems that at the very least, the content from Schmitz et al. needs to be rewritten to avoid a possible copyvio.  Oh, and the content from Kreigs et al. has to be explicitly attributed.  In addition, I think the entire page could use some reworking.  It's not quite structured like a "real" article -- no introductory paragraph, no sections other than "References".  And does anyone else think that this page merits inclusion in WikiProject_Molecular_and_Cellular_Biology?    --Iknowyourider (talk) 05:49, 14 June 2007 (UTC)