Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/The Nets/Reporting copyright infringement

There are several ways to report copyright issues on Wikipedia. Text and other media are handled differently, and the approaches to each may vary by the nature of the problem.

Identifying copyright concerns
Copyright concerns exist where text or media are placed on Wikipedia from previously published sources that are not verifiably free for use and the material is not handled according to non-free content guidelines (WP:NFC). Even if the previously published source does not carry a copyright notice, it is presumed to be copyrighted unless we have a reason to know that it is free, i.e. if public domain for age or other reason. If a source is licensed compatibly for use but that license is not adhered to — for instance, if attribution is required but not given — this is also a copyright concern, even if the source is another Wikipedia article (see Copying within Wikipedia).

Non-free content that is not used appropriately under WP:NFC represents a copyright concern. For example, even if quoted and attributed, extensive use of quotations from copyrighted sources is prohibited. A non-free image is a copyright concern if used outside of article namespace or if it otherwise violates the guidelines for such use.

While copyright concerns are more obvious when duplication is exact, they may also exist when the original source has been insufficiently altered. An image that incorporates or draws on a previously published image may be a derivative work. Text that paraphrases too closely on a non-free source may also infringe. (See Close paraphrasing)

Reporting issues with text
The handling of text-based copyright concerns depends on how extensive the problem is and the history of the article in which it appears.

For traditional "copyright problem" issues
If you are sure that content is copied or too closely paraphrases a non-free source, handling depends on whether the problem is with the entire article or only part of it.

In either case, as an alternative to tagging the article for administrator/copyright clerk investigation, you can simply replace the problematic content with material rewritten from scratch. Given the backlog of copyright work, this is often the best way to handle copyright issues. If you cannot, however, please follow through with tagging. It is better to enter it into the backlog than leave it unaddressed.

If the entire article is a problem
If the entire article is a problem and any text that doesn't look like a copy / paste could not survive alone as an article:
 * Click on the history tab and look at the earliest edit.
 * If the article was started as a copy / paste and there's no permission or ownership asserted, nominate it for speedy deletion with
 * If the article was started with different text, check to see if the copyvio was recently added. If it was, revert to a clean version.
 * You can put at the article's talk page to explain your action.
 * You can alert the editor who added it with or  at his or her talk page.
 * You may use on the article to alert an administrator to delete the copyvio from history.


 * If it looks like the copy / paste has been there for a while or if its foundational but there's reason to believe the person who added it here is the copyright owner, and you do not wish to rewrite the page from scratch, please tag it for investigation with and then look at the bottom right of the big boilerplate template that now replaces the article: it will contain two pre-set lines to copy / paste, one on today's listing on the Copyright Problems board, the other one on the article's creator or the person who most likely added the copyrighted content.

If only part of the article is a problem

 * Check the history. If the text was recently added, revert the article to a "clean" version or remove the text and place at the article's talk page to explain your action.
 * If you can identify the contributor, alert him or her by placing at his or her talk page.
 * If the copy-pasting is extensive you may use on the article to alert an administrator to delete the copyvio from history.


 * If the text was not recently added and:
 * You rewrite the section or sections from scratch,
 * consider using a subject line like "Rewriting copyright problem" and adding to the article's talk page so people don't accidentally restore the older edit, bringing the copyright problem back into the article.
 * You may want use on the article to alert an administrator to delete the copyvio from history, especially if the copyvio is extensive.
 * Please try to identify the contributor who added the content and alert him or her by placing or  at his or her talk page. It's helpful to see if the contributor has added other content to the article which may also be problematic.
 * You do not wish to rewrite the section or sections from scratch,
 * Tag the article for investigation with and then look at the bottom right of the big boilerplate template that now replaces the article: it will contain two pre-set lines to copy / paste, one on today's listing on the Copyright Problems board, the other one on the article's creator or the person who most likely added the copyrighted content (if you can tell who it was).
 * If you can identify the contributor, it's helpful to see if other content they have added to the article is also problematic.

For other copyright concerns

 * If an article may overuse non-free text, as with quotes that are likely to be too extensive under WP:NFC, consider how extensive the issue seems to be.
 * If the overuse is borderline and you do not wish to modify the article to remove the overuse of quotations, you may tag the article non-free. Please consider placing an explanation of your concerns at the article's talk page. Frequently, contributors who use overly extensive quotations intend no harm.
 * If it is extreme and you cannot truncate the quotes, you may wish to blank the article for investigation at the copyright problems board. Tag it for investigation with and then look at the bottom right of the big boilerplate template that now replaces the article: it will contain two pre-set lines to copy / paste, one on today's listing on the Copyright Problems board, the other one on the article's creator or the person who most likely added the copyrighted content (if you can tell who it was). In this case, it is often a very good idea to replace the code intended for copying and pasting at the user talk page with a personal note explaining your concern and letting them know that an uninvolved administrator will evaluate the matter after a week. They can be invited to put comments about the issue on the article's talk page.


 * If you think content may be copied but can't find the source, you can use cv-unsure on the article's talk page to flag your concerns.


 * If you are sure that content is closely paraphrased but not a violation of copyright policy, you can tag the article close paraphrasing. (If you think it may violate copyright policy, you should handle it as you would copied text, described in the sections above.) A note on the talk page explaining the issue may be helpful.


 * If the content in the article has been copied from one or more other Wikipedia articles and you do not have time to add proper attribution as per WP:CWW, tag the article CWW (if only one article was involved) or CWW-multi (if more than one).

Reporting issues with media
If you encounter non-text media that is indisputably non-free, and it can comply with our non-free content policy, be bold and retag it as a non-free image with an appropriate tag. Otherwise, you may consult the lists below for the appropriate tag for the problem you've encountered. Be sure to check the template that will appear on the media after tagging to see if additional steps, such as notifying the contributor, are necessary.

For media claimed under free license

 * If the media lacks a source, so copyright status cannot be determined, follow the usage directions at Template:Di-no source. Note that editors sometimes specify such information in the upload summary, so be sure to check the circumstances of the image.
 * If the media lists a source with no evidence of permission, such as release at the source website or OTRS ticket number, follow the usage directions at Template:Di-no permission. This does not apply to images where the uploader claims to be the copyright holder.
 * If a copyright infringement is blatant—that is, if the media is claimed under a free license when this is obviously not the case—it may be tagged for speedy deletion under speedy deletion criterion F9. This does not include media used under a claim of fair use, nor does it include media with a credible claim that the owner has released them under a Wikipedia-compatible free license. Those may, instead, be handled by one of the processes below. This does include images from stock photo libraries such as Getty Images or Corbis.
 * Tag the media with, replacing "original source" with the URL where the media may be found. No further action is mandatory, but it is a courtesy to notify the contributor as well as a good idea for administrative purposes. Not only might it prevent future copyright violations from that user, but it will help other contributors recognize if such issues become a pattern. The tag will generate a notice which may be easily pasted onto the user's talk page.
 * If a copyright infringement is not blatant—that is, if you dispute the source or licensing information, but further investigation may be necessary to confirm infringement—it should be listed for review at files for discussion.
 * Tag the media with ffd. Directions for using this tag are found at Template:Ffd. Be sure that you follow through after tagging the media by notifying the contributor and listing the file at the possibly unfree files page as directed at that template. You may wish to monitor the conversation there in case your further input may be helpful in resolving the issue. Files are listed at that page for 14 days before they are processed.

For media of uncertain or restricted license
If the media:
 * lacks a license, follow the directions at Template:Di-no license. Note that editors sometimes specify such information in the upload summary, so be sure to check the circumstances of the image.
 * is not truly public domain or licensed under GFDL or an appropriate Creative Commons license and claims non-commercial use, non-derivative use or used with permission, if it was uploaded after May 19, 2005 'or is not used in any articles, you may tag it with Db-f3, but first consider whether it can be properly brought into compliance with our non-free content policy. If it can, please provide a fair use tag and a fair use rationale, also adding Non-free with NC to files licensed for non-commercial use.

For media claimed under fair use
For fair use media:
 * with no non-free use rationale if the file was uploaded after May 4, 2006, tag the image as {{subst:nrd}}.
 * with vague or inappropriate justifications that do not meet non-free content guidelines, tag the media as.
 * that are replaceable by free media that could be located, tag the file as {{subst:rfu}}.
 * that are not being used in any article, tag the file as {{subst:orfud}}.
 * that have been replaced by a smaller size, to request deletion of previous versions, tag the file Non-free reduced. (To request that a file be replaced with a smaller size, use Non-free reduce.)
 * which do not meet the above but may not meet non-free content criteria for other reasons, list at Files for deletion according to instructions there to invite community review.