Wikipedia talk:Contributor copyright investigations/Vanished 6551232

I know people raised concerns, but does anyone else here agree that this has got to be the most massive waste of time we have yet to see on wiki? Thoughts? Montanabw (talk) 21:20, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I guess what I'd be keen to know from folks who've spent alot of time reviewing the articles here is the frequency of paraphrasing that was found - was it a little or quite a bit. Wizardman or anyone else able to comment? Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:22, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * In CCIs, most paraphrasing/copyvio issues tend to be found in the first 100 or so articles, with ones further down the list ideally not having much. I've found a handful here, mostly removals of a sentence or two, but until this is actually completed we won't be able to tell if this was a serious CCI case or a minor one. Ideally those working on the PumpkinSky CCI will move over to this one. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 17:41, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I do think comparing this to the ItsLassieTime sock is well worth looking at; that sockpuppet collection was doing wholesale cut and paste of entire articles. A sentence or two of close paraphrasing is simply something that needs to be fixed, as really anyone can do it (especially if you have other contributors complaining about "original research" if you go too far afield in phrasing) and a close paraphrase with a cited source it is not a copyright violation by the legal definition (in that the original creator would sue WP) so much as it's just undesirable style and something a good writer avoids.  Montanabw (talk) 01:22, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

How do we handle works with no online version? For example, in the William Hanna article, the source, Barbera, Joseph (1994). My Life in "Toons" is very limited and doesn't give all the text in a google books search. Montanabw (talk) 20:32, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Because of the way he seemed to go about using the sources (tweaking copypasted sentences which ended up as close paraphrases), I believe we can AGF on offline sources, something I can't say about most CCIs; the ones I have been able to check on Google Books have been okay. The only article that concerns me is the Boyce one because the vast majority of that is an offline source. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 04:31, 25 August 2012 (UTC)