Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2016 September 16

16 September 2016

 * Terrace Theatre (Minnesota) ([ history] · [ last edit] · rewrite) from https://www.facebook.com/birdtowntower/info/?entry_point=about_section_header&tab=page_infon which has some of the same content at http://robbinsdalehistoricalsociety.org/the-mighty-terrace/ http://www.historicterracetheatre.com/about-the-terrace/ (not clear which came first), The latter two urls are licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0 but appear to themselves copy from Twin Cities Picture Show: A Century of Moviegoing Minnesota Historical Society Press, November 1, 2007 By Dave Kenney This is an unfortunate one. There have been many hands involved in editing this one (because there is a controversy going on right now over the potential tear down of this historically significant theater, many people trying to save it, a lawsuit involved, and so forth). I was adding and fixing some content myself when I saw many hallmarks of copying and began looking. You'll see in the history I spent a fair amount of time trying to remove violations to try to save save it from a G12, but then I kept discovering more, and once I looked more globally, I found the first revision appeared to have been a copyvio. If someone is willing to spend hours separating the wheat from the chaff, to figure out what interstitial parts are not tainted and save those portions, then maybe we can save it, but substantial effort will be needed.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:14, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Update. So upon further investigation, the website of the society is licensed under CC-By-SA 4.0, but (as noted above) and putting aside the Facebook issue, there is some indication that it, in turn, copies from the 2007 book. I have requested that someone who has access to the book check at WP:RX.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:25, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Pictogram voting question.svg|20px]] No vio found, claim cannot be validated. Tag removed from article. That is, I have independently checked the book's text and found sufficient paraphrasing so I am closing the investigation. There is a possible other book involved, but it appears the author of that significantly contributed to the CC-by-SA 4.0 website, so I presume that is a sufficient release of their copyright.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:50, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Pictogram voting question.svg|20px]] No vio found, claim cannot be validated. Tag removed from article. That is, I have independently checked the book's text and found sufficient paraphrasing so I am closing the investigation. There is a possible other book involved, but it appears the author of that significantly contributed to the CC-by-SA 4.0 website, so I presume that is a sufficient release of their copyright.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:50, 19 September 2016 (UTC)