Wikipedia talk:Contributor copyright investigations/20100307

Thought I'd note that I just removed some copyright-infringing content added by Rms to. Not to add more work to an already massive backlog, but maybe this should be expanded to non-biographical articles as well? — PinkAmpers  &#38;  ( Je vous invite à me parler )  13:35, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure that the short snippet "Established in 1888, Bayonne Medical Center is a 278-bed, fully accredited, acute-care hospital." qualifies as copyright-infringing content, as it is just giving a few basic facts, but the reference for this information should have been cited. Wbm1058 (talk) 14:11, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * True. As it is, I left in a reworded version. (The original phrasing also has that air of P.R. you get when quoting from any organization's self-description.) My point was more that this shows that at least on some levels the copyright issues extend outside of biographies. But I suppose you're right that we'd need something more solid to warrant expanding the CCI. — PinkAmpers  &#38;  ( Je vous invite à me parler )  14:31, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * There actually are quite a few non-bios listed in this CCI, so it looks like this is already comprehensive. Wizardman  14:57, 17 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I am responding as the CCI is on my watchlist and your colloquy thus came to my attention. I made one factual edit like three years ago to the Bayonne Medical Center article, in which I included the source from which the information came. This "snippet" is a big deal?? I didn't create many of the articles on the CCI watchlist, for that matter; in some cases made only minor edits. I created relatively few non-bio articles. I should have been notified of this colloquy to defend myself. I must add that the comments "... original phrasing also has that air of P.R. you get when quoting from any organization's self-description.) My point was more that this shows that at least on some levels the copyright issues extend outside of biographies" sound like biased synthesis to me. Quis separabit?  16:47, 18 May 2013 (UTC)