Talk:Rolls-Royce Phantom VIII/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Ral 33 (talk · contribs) 04:47, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Process status
I am currently in the process of reviewing this article. Ral 33 (talk) 04:47, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Problem
Doing a quick Copyright Violation check https://tools.wmflabs.org/copyvios/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&oldid=817355099&action=compare&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DL7cK1AvcnPs I’ve found that the article is 81% likely to be plagerised. I will update this page when I find more info. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ral 33 (talk • contribs) 04:53, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * It looks as though the disambiguation page was submitted not the page up for GA review, it also seems likely that the disambiguation page which has looked roughy the same for ten years was not plagiarised by time travelers from a 2016 youtube description. Toasted Meter (talk) 06:33, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Doing such a check on the correct page brings this up which is another youtube description and was copy pasted so carelessly from Wikipedia that "Equipment[edit]" did not have the "[edit]" removed. Toasted Meter (talk) 06:40, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I had decided to do a plagerism check on the disambigustion page since I found plagerisn on the page that was submitted and I think I put the wrong link. Ral 33 (talk) 12:59, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * https://tools.wmflabs.org/copyvios/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Rolls-Royce_Phantom_%282018%29&oldid=&action=search&use_engine=1&use_links=1&turnitin=0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ral 33 (talk • contribs) 16:33, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * How on earth did you not see that this is the most obvious case of WP:BACKWARDSCOPY, the guy with the youtube video just copied the Wikipedia page, he left the bloody "[edit]" in along with "[10]" which is a citation. Look at this revision two days before the video was posted, it happens to have changes that were in the description, it's incredably clear that it is not plagiarized. Toasted Meter (talk) 23:58, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * not the reasonRal 33 (talk) 00:29, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * before you argue with me read this and the many other sentences, paragraphs in some cases that were copied word for word... https://tools.wmflabs.org/copyvios/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&oldid=821359450&action=compare&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.carmagazine.co.uk%2Fcar-news%2Ffirst-official-pictures%2Frolls-royce%2Frolls-royce-phantom-eighth-generation-2017-pics-specs-and-price%2F

Ral 33 (talk) 02:56, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Final Decision
Fail

Reason
Considering this page is highly plagiarized, I suggest that the word-for-word copying in this article be removed and information improved. After that, you can reapply. Ral 33 (talk) 16:45, 19 January 2018 (UTC)