Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2023 March 6

6 March 2023

 * Ruston Daily Leader ([ history] · [ last edit] · rewrite) from Various. Presumptive, see Contributor copyright investigations/20110727 15. Foundational, full article. Wizardman  02:07, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting delete.svg Article deleted due to copyright concerns. MER-C 19:05, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Draft:D. A. Jayasuriya ([ history] · [ last edit] · rewrite) from . Appears closely paraphrased from Gombrich, Richard; Obeyesekere, Gananath (1988). Buddhism Transformed: Religious Change in Sri Lanka (1 ed.). Princeton, USA: Princeton University Press. pp. 353–381. ISBN 8120807022. Source is used throughout article. I verified some snippets through manual Google Books searches, but do not have access to book to validate the extent of close paraphrasing or attempt a cleanup. /wiae /tlk  11:43, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting delete.svg Article deleted due to copyright concerns. MER-C 19:04, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Finitist set theory ([ history] · [ last edit] · rewrite) from https://content.iospress.com/articles/applied-ontology/ao196. An editor asserts that our article is copied verbatim from this source, however it is paywalled and I do not have access to confirm copyright status. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 20:44, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting delete.svg Article deleted due to copyright concerns. Whpq (talk) 02:31, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I have not checked the entire article, but entire paragraphs from the intro, "Complete FST models" and "FST definitions" sections are lifted basically word for word from the source. Would probably be worth checking the other sources for issues as well. I am technically not a clerk so I think I am supposed to leave this for them to handle? /wiae /tlk  11:25, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * It is unlikely that other sources have been used the same way, since they are citations lifted from the manuscript. The user has now claimed to be the author of the manuscript (or more precisely the author of another manuscript by the same author), and also retains copyright. It is up to him to decide what to do with it. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 09:22, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I believe it is up to the publisher, not the author, but I could be wrong. The same editor also republished their own work at Point-accessibility operators for temporal logic, which was flagged but turned out to be released under CC-BY 4.0. However, I cannot find a copyright statement for the journal that this source is published in, but being paywalled doesn't give a lot of hope for it being freely licensed. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:27, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
 * You're probably right. I believe the license is similar to this one. Although this is not from 2018 when the article was published, but an updated version. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 09:35, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I was able to gain access to a complete copy of the paper via the Wikipedia Library. I used text fragments from the beginning of paragraphs and sections from throughout the article and was able to match those fragments verbatim in the paper.  I also eyeballed the remainder of the paragraphs and sections and they look to be the same.  So to my eyes, the entire article is a copy of the paper.  If the author of the Wikipedia article does hold the copyright to the paper, they will need to have that confirmed via WP:VRT.  The paper states "© 2018 – IOS Press and the authors. All rights reserved" on the first page, and the last page of the paper states "Copyright of Applied Ontology is the property of IOS Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use". -- Whpq (talk) 02:29, 24 March 2023 (UTC)