Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2014 April 16

16 April 2014

 * Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Stuart Crystal (Jewelry)
 * Dear copyright experts: This article was declined at Afc and then improved, but never resubmitted. In the meantime, much of the text was posted at this Wordpress site:, but the editor makes it clear that the reason was to get help for the Wikipedia article.  Although it isn't properly attributed, is it reasonable to say that this is not a copyright violation here at Wikipedia, and move the draft into the encyclopedia?  &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 21:48, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Hello, User:Anne Delong. :) The content having been deleted, this may have resolved itself, but are you asking if it's okay for somebody to incorporate content onto Wikipedia that has been improved elsewhere if they say it's for the Wikipedia article? The brief answer is probably not - copyright requires an explicit assignment. Unless there's clear indication that the content is to be licensed under GFDL and CC-By-SA, saying it's going to be used "on Wikipedia" is not sufficient (since content here can be reused elsewhere), and even if there were, we would need clear indication of what rights (if any) are reserved by the contributors. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:58, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Moonriddengirl, there is no indication on the Pragmatic Costumer site that the content was improved in any way after having been posted there. The editor made a draft article, submitted it and was declined, and then LATER posted the already existing Wikipedia draft content on a blog and on a Facebook page, asking for help. Doesn't the fact that the textt  was already present on Wikipedia before being posted elsewhere mean that it was licensed?  Otherwise, we'd have to delete every article as soon as its contents were posted somewhere without an accompanying licensing notice. &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 13:26, 29 April 2014 (UTC)