Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2023 November 25

25 November 2023

 * Red La Soda ([ history] · [ last edit] · rewrite) from https://books.google.com/books?id=eCxwCAAAQBAJ "most of the article has been copied from this book". MER-C 13:09, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm seeing that the book is copyright 2015, but I'm noticing that the edits that added the content that's verbatim the same as is on page 55 of the book was added in 2013. Other content on the same page in the book is the same exact wording as that in our article on the Red Norland, but the relevant content was first placed on Wikipedia in 2011. The same goes for page 55's description of the Ratte potato, which closely mirrors text that had been first published on Wikipedia not later than 2007. This may well be an instance of backwardscopy, since the book was published more recently and its text closely matches text that was written by several different authors on Wikipedia.
 * Anything I'm missing here? — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 06:07, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting support.svg Backwardscopy. Tag placed at talk page. —  Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 19:25, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Operating Thetan, OT VIII, R2-45, Marcab Confederacy, Scientology: A History of Man, Rehabilitation Project Force all link to leaked Scientology things on WikiLeaks. The Church of Scientology claims it is copyright and WP:RSP warns about WP:COPYLINK but Scientology talks about copyright a lot and theres things I dont know so I wanted to report and not remove Softlem (talk) 17:26, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Is this listing specifically about the WP:COPYLINK issues, and not about the text of the article itself? Just looking for a bit of clarity. — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 15:50, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes just COPYLINK. I only found this and media copyright noticeboard sorry if its wrong place Softlem (talk) 16:41, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
 * On one hand, there isn't really a better place for this. On another hand, this would require not only for the clerks and patrolling admins here to hunt down replacement sources for probably copyrighted and secret Scientology sources considering it's Wikileaks, but also to firstly find where and what it's linking to, and if the content should be linked to; that would take effort beyond what I would reasonably ask of anyone not directly responsible for the problem to do. I would try to find ways to replace the COPYLINKs with adequate replacements, or rewrite the content in a way where there is no need for the leaked stuff to be directly linked to, and employ the help of people within the Scientology topic area to do so. Sennecaster  ( Chat ) 21:37, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * this would require not only for the clerks and patrolling admins here to hunt down replacement sources for probably copyrighted and secret Scientology sources considering it's Wikileaks No because most of it isnt needed
 * but also to firstly find where and what it's linking to, and if the content should be linked to Thats what editors are supposed to do
 * try to find ways to replace the COPYLINKs with adequate replacements, or rewrite the content in a way where there is no need for the leaked stuff to be directly linked to That is easy if editors agree it is okay to remove the COPYLINK vio links but because Scientology talks about copyright a lot and theres things I dont know so I wanted to report before I needed other editors to help decide Softlem (talk) 11:41, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry to say but I think that Thats what editors are supposed to do is out of scope for what the editors here are expected to do to resolve copyright issues, especially since it seems to be a very broad and more systemic issue with no specifics given to us. Without looking at the specifics, generally, WikiLeaks isn't good to link to in the first place. Could you possibly take this to the wikiproject for their assistance? Sennecaster  ( Chat ) 02:01, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
 * out of scope for what the editors here are expected to do to resolve copyright issues makes sense
 * Without looking at the specifics, generally, WikiLeaks isn't good to link to in the first place Agree
 * Could you possibly take this to the wikiproject for their assistance? Yes and thank for help. Can you give me link so I know I go to right place? Softlem (talk) 10:25, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
 * WT:WikiProject Scientology is where I would check first, or barring that, starting a discussion on the talk pages of the individual pages. It might also be a decent idea to be bold. Sennecaster  ( Chat ) 06:38, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
 * WESTconsin Credit Union ([ history] · [ last edit] · rewrite) from https://www.westconsincu.org/about-us/connect/kindness-counts/. jlwoodwa (talk) 22:14, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting keep.svg Article cleaned by investigator or others. No remaining infringement. MER-C 08:22, 4 December 2023 (UTC)