Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera/Subpage for organizing CopyVio Cleanup

This page is for organizing the clean-up of opera-related articles which may have copyright infringements. Our purpose here is to address a potentially serious legal concern for Wikipedia and to maintain the integrity of articles under the scope of WikiProject Opera.

Below are two lists of opera-related articles which need to be checked for close paraphrase or pasted copyright text and if found, repaired.

All Wikipedia editors are encouraged to assist with the matters below. Some tips for doing so are found at WikiProject Copyright Cleanup/How to clean copyright infringements. If you would like to volunteer please add your name to Participants list below. There is also a Discussion section at the bottom of the page for comments and queries relating to the clean-up.

Background


Articles listed here appear on Nrswanson articles created or on User:Nrswanson - articles created and User:Nrswanson - articles with significant contributions + any other articles editors feel need checking. Instances of copypaste and close paraphrasing from copyright sources has been found in multiple articles by this user, many from Grove Music Online.

The contributions of the following known sockpuppets of this user are also being checked:


 * articles created Note: rarely used Grove, articles appear to have been based on google-translated German and Czech sites and newspaper articles. From what we've seen so far, they aren't obviously copyvio, but they will eventually need to be checked. Update: There is now a contributor copyright investigation available which lists all edits by "Singingdaisies" prioritising by size of edit and number of contributions to the article. See: CCI/Singingdaisies fo the full list.


 * articles created Note: None of these have obvious copyvio.


 * articles created Note: Only one article, Irena Troupová, no copyvio.
 * articles created Note: Only created one article, Giuseppe Nicolini (writer). No copyvio found. One significant contribution to Giuseppe Nicolini. It was copyvio and has been stubbed.
 * Note: No articles created. Significantly expanded several. Les Arts Florissants (ensemble) checked, no copyvio. Remaining contributions seem not to be blatant copyvio.
 * articles created Note: All opera-related articles checked, all were copyvio - 3 reduced to stubs and 14 deleted.


 * articles created Note: generally only made minor edits or created articles on non-opera-related subjects. New opera-related articles have been added to the list(s) below for checking.

The following further sockpuppets of this user did not contribute significantly or at all to opera-related articles:

,, , , , ,

The user also made at least some edits as anonymous IP 70.185.222.155.

Update: Following this Opera Project discussion and the results of Sockpuppet investigations/Nrswanson/Archive Report date March 8 2010, this editor has been given a second chance and now edits as User:4meter4.

Articles primarily sourced from Grove reference works
Articles listed here have significant sections known to be referenced to Grove Music Online or other Grove reference books (Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, New Grove Dictionary of Opera, etc.) which have had only 1 or two editors. Short stubs are excluded for the moment as are articles which have had multiple authors over a long time period, unless they contain large chunks from a single editor. Note that to check these articles, you need a subscription to Grove Music Online (or access to the hard copy Grove reference books). Please add any further articles that are sourced (or possibly sourced) from Grove that require checking. To add an article to this list, use:  # .


 * If you are currently checking an article add y next to it so we don't duplicate our work.


 * If you find no copyright violations, move the article to Checked articles judged OK or repaired


 * If all of the content appears to be a copyright infringement, check the page history. If an older non-infringing version of the page exists, you should revert the page to that version, taking care not to lose the categories, DEFAULTSORT, navboxes, etc. which may have been added at the time of the infringement. When removing copyright material, make sure you leave an edit summary to that effect. Removal of large chunks, should also be noted on the article's talkpage. Once this is done move the article to Checked articles judged OK or repaired.


 * If all or most of the article is a clear copyright infringement, there is no clean version, and you cannot immediately repair it, place   at the top of the article and then add the article to the Checked articles needing repair list below. Note that using copyvio on an article is drastic step. If there are scattered instances of possible copyvio (and many editors) it's best to mention it on the talk page and list the article at Copyright problems instead. The copyright people can then investigate it. Or just move it to the Checked articles needing repair section here with appropriate comments. Note also that an article may appear to have been copied from another source, but actually the other source copied from Wikipedia - often without attribution. If there is significant doubt about who copied whom, just report the issue at Copyright problems or here rather than adding the big copyvio tag.
 * Operas
 * 1) - was a DYK
 * 2) - was a DYK - appears to have close paraphrasing in places can't tell if from Grove or elsewhere, needs more checking
 * 3) - was a DYK
 * 4) - was a DYK
 * 5) - was a DYK
 * 6) - was a DYK
 * Biographies
 * 1) - not entirely sure. I've checked and it's not a straight copy/paste job but the paraphrase is a little too close for comfort at some points. This could use another pair of eyes. Moreschi (talk) 23:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) - was a DYK
 * 3) - was a DYK
 * 4) - was a DYK - looks to be OK from a Grove point of view but this is another one sourced to operissimo. Needs a German-speaker to check it. Moreschi (talk) 20:02, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 5) - was a DYK
 * 6) - was a DYK
 * 7) - was a DYK
 * 8) - was a DYK
 * 9) - was a DYK
 * 10) - was a DYK
 * 11) - was a DYK
 * 12) - was a DYK
 * 13) - was a DYK
 * 14) - was a DYK
 * 15) - was a DYK
 * 1) - was a DYK

Checked articles needing repair
This list is for checked articles with close paraphrasing /verbatim copyright material which has not been removed or re-written. If you are currently repairing an article here add y next to it so we don't duplicate our work. Once repaired, move it to Checked articles judged OK or repaired below.

Checked articles judged OK or repaired
Add "OK" if it was OK at the outset. If it did contain close paraphrasing/verbatim copyright text when checked and it is now repaired, add "repaired" next to it. Please add in alphabetical order by first letter of the title.


 * 1) - (was a DYK) - looks like it has copypaste, can't tell if from Grove or elsewhere, needs more checking - in fact Grove is the only source here which has NOT been plagiarised. The entire text is corrupt, with some ludicrously close paraphrasings and straight copy/paste jobs from opera today etc. Moreschi (talk) 13:06, 14 October 2009 (UTC) Update: Synopsis removed. Most of the scattered lifts actually have quote marks, but use of quotes is probably excessive. The bit about the riot is too closely paraphrased. Needs more repair. Voceditenore (talk) 14:00, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Just deleted, the whole thing was either copy/paste or close paraphrase and would have needed stubbing anyway. Might as well be rewritten from scratch. Moreschi (talk) 14:02, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Recreated as a one-sentence stub. I think that's OK, and I'll expand it a little further, unless there's any particular reason why the history needs to be preserved? Moreschi (talk) 14:13, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I've now re-added the parts that weren't copy vio and noted all on the talk page with links for expansion. In future cases like this, it's better to reduce the article to a stub with basic information, retaining role tables, templates, etc. Alternatively add Template:Copyvio to blank the article and give us some breathing space to fix it. Immediate deletion in these cases is way too drastic and no other editors have access to the original material that is salvageable, e.g. role tables etc. Voceditenore (talk) 14:48, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, good point, that last one. Forgotten that, you get so used to seeing deletedrevs you forget most people can't. Moreschi (talk) 14:54, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * : I've attributed & cited one unattributed quote, but I got a google books hit on New Grove, . This one obviously duplicates text from that source, but I do not know how extensively as I do not have it. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:20, 25 September 2009 (UTC) Update: Synopsis was verbatim from Grove. Now deleted. Voceditenore (talk) 12:55, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) - extensive, rewritten as stub
 * 2)  -  extensive  - repaired
 * 3) - was a DYK - OK. This, and all the Young/Lampe articles that follow, look to be OK from a Grove point of view but are at least half sourced to a German-language source at operissimo.com which I can't read. Somebody needs to check this. Moreschi (talk) 13:42, 14 October 2009 (UTC) I've checked the German source (Suspect he used Google translator.) No copyvio from that, but he appears to have misunderstood some of the contents and some of these articles may contain factual errors/confusions.  But that's another issue. I'm passing them all as OK vis-vis copyvio. Voceditenore (talk) 07:07, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 4)  - was a DYK - extensive, now repaired. Moreschi (talk) 19:46, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 5) - was a DYK- Grove copyvios removed (some were disguised by falsely referencing them to another source). There may be copyvios from other sources still present. --Folantin (talk) 10:37, 25 October 2009 (UTC) Rest checked - OK Voceditenore (talk) 12:14, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * 6) - was a DYK - OK (See Anthony Young (musician))
 * 7) - was a DYK- too much close paraphrasing. Reverted to pre-Swanson version while retaining useful additions by other editors made since then.--Folantin (talk) 09:51, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 8)  Deleted copyvio material; re-wrote some sections; done. Antandrus  (talk) 16:44, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 9) - was a DYK - OK (See Anthony Young (musician))
 * 10) (was a DYK) - yup. Riddled with sentences here and there that are copyvio from Grove but the bulk of the material is sourced from elsewhere. I can't check this but suspect it's copyvio as well and am minded to delete the whole thing. Moreschi (talk) 12:55, 14 October 2009 (UTC). Update: Repaired -  egregious bits removed, and others re-written. Should be OK. Voceditenore (talk) 13:44, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 11) - was a DYK - OK (See Anthony Young (musician))
 * 12) - extensive, reverted to last clean version Voceditenore (talk) 05:46, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 13) - was a DYK - OK
 * 14) - ok
 * 15) - extensive, reverted to last clean version Voceditenore (talk) 05:46, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 16)  - ok
 * 17)  Deleted material which violated Grove copyright and other content which was possible copyvio. Replaced synopsis with my own work from another article.--Folantin (talk) 16:33, 3 October 2009 (UTC) (was a DYK )
 * 18)  Ditto (see Griselda (Giovanni Bononcini)) . --Folantin (talk) 16:33, 3 October 2009 (UTC) (was a DYK)
 * 19) some minor close para removed, rest OK
 * 20)  -  minor instances, not contiguous - repaired (was a DYK)
 * 21)  - repaired
 * 22) - was a DYK - OK (See Anthony Young (musician))
 * 23) - was a DYK - OK (See Anthony Young (musician))
 * 24)  -  extensive  - repaired
 * 25)  - repaired
 * 26)  - ok
 * 27) - extensive, stubbed Voceditenore (talk) 05:58, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 28)  Reverted to pre-Swanson version.--Folantin (talk) 16:33, 3 October 2009 (UTC) + further removal of copyvio synopsis placed by a different editor. Voceditenore (talk) 09:40, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 29)  Google books picks up hits from Grove, although it's not given as source. - Yup. Copyvio. Nuked. Moreschi (talk) 23:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 30) - was a DYK - OK (See Anthony Young (musician))
 * 31)  - fine. Moreschi (talk) 23:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 32) - was a DYK - OK
 * 33) - was a DYK - OK
 * 34)   - repaired (was a DYK)
 * 35)  - 1 paragraph was too close to Grove, now cleaned up. Moreschi (talk) 23:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 36) - was a DYK - Way too much close-paraphrasing. Reverted to pre-Swanson. Non-Swanson edits retained.--Folantin (talk) 10:25, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 37) - extensive, repaired by removal, Grove is cited but real source of copy/paste (unacknowledged) was: .  Voceditenore (talk) 12:47, 14 October 2009 (UTC) (was a DYK)
 * 38) - extensive, rewritten (was a DYK)

Articles from other sources
To add an article to this list, use:  # .


 * If you are currently checking an article add y next to it so we don't duplicate our work.


 * If you find no copyright violations, move the article to Checked articles judged OK or repaired


 * If all of the content appears to be a copyright infringement, check the page history. If an older non-infringing version of the page exists, you should revert the page to that version, taking care not to lose the categories, DEFAULTSORT, navboxes, etc. which may have been added at the time of the infringement. When removing copyright material, make sure you leave an edit summary to that effect. Removal of large chunks, should also be noted on the article's talkpage. Once this is done move the article to Checked articles judged OK or repaired.


 * If all or most of the article is a clear copyright infringement, there is no clean version, and you cannot immediately repair it, place   at the top of the article and then add the article to the Checked articles needing repair list below. Note that using copyvio on an article is drastic step. If there are scattered instances of possible copyvio (and many editors) it's best to mention it on the talk page and list the article at Copyright problems. The copyright people can then investigate it. Or just move it to the Checked articles needing repair section here with appropriate comments. Note also that an article may appear to have been copied from another source, but actually the other source copied from Wikipedia - often without attribution. If there is significant doubt about who copied whom, just report the issue at Copyright problems or here rather than adding the big copyvio tag.

Opera singers, composers, librettists, etc.

 * 1) - article does not obviously copy available cited resources, but the principal source appears to be an article in The New York Times with no online link (its links are to Wikipedia entries for the paper, date, and year), which therefore will need checking in hard copy.
 * 2) - was a DYK
 * 1) - article does not obviously copy available cited resources, but the principal source appears to be an article in The New York Times with no online link (its links are to Wikipedia entries for the paper, date, and year), which therefore will need checking in hard copy.
 * 2) - was a DYK
 * 1) - article does not obviously copy available cited resources, but the principal source appears to be an article in The New York Times with no online link (its links are to Wikipedia entries for the paper, date, and year), which therefore will need checking in hard copy.
 * 2) - was a DYK
 * 1) - article does not obviously copy available cited resources, but the principal source appears to be an article in The New York Times with no online link (its links are to Wikipedia entries for the paper, date, and year), which therefore will need checking in hard copy.
 * 2) - was a DYK

Checked articles needing repair
This list is for checked articles with close paraphrasing/verbatim copyright material which has not been removed or re-written. If you are currently repairing an article here add y next to it so we don't duplicate our work. Once repaired, move it to Checked articles judged OK or repaired below.

Checked articles judged OK or repaired
Add "OK" if it was OK at the outset. If it did contain close paraphrasing/verbatim copyright text when checked and it is now repaired, add "repaired" next to it. Please add in alphabetical order by first letter of the title.

Operas

 * 1) - repaired
 * 2) - repaired. Synopsis removed. See talk for details.
 * 3) - repaired. Synopsis removed. See talk for details.
 * 4) - OK
 * 5)  - repaired  "Historical background and musical analysis" section to remove verbatim pastes from copyright sources, mark and attribute quote, etc.
 * 6) - repaired
 * 7)  - OK
 * 8) - repaired (entire synopsis closely paraphrased from  has been removed)
 * 9) synopsis needs to be checked possibly against Holden, Viking Opera Guide. Close paraphrasing in synopsis from . Reverted to previous version of synopsis.
 * 10) - repaired (entire synopsis closely paraphrased and in parts verbatim from  has been removed)
 * 11)  - OK
 * 12) - OK
 * 13)  OK
 * 14) – repaired (entire synopsis closely paraphrased from  has been removed)
 * 15)  - OK
 * 16) - OK
 * 17)  - OK
 * 18) - OK
 * 19) - repaired
 * 20) - OK
 * 21)  - OK
 * 22)  - OK
 * 23)  OK
 * 24) - OK
 * 25)  - OK
 * 26) - OK
 * 27) - OK
 * 28)  - OK
 * 29)  - OK
 * 30)  - OK
 * 31) - OK
 * 32) - OK
 * 33)  OK
 * 34)  - OK
 * 35)  - repaired (entire synopsis closely paraphrased from  has been removed)
 * 36)  - OK
 * 37) - OK
 * 38) - OK
 * 39)  - OK
 * 40) - OK
 * 41)  - OK
 * 42) - OK
 * 43) - repaired

Opera companies, ensembles

 * 1)  - repaired
 * 2)  - OK
 * 3)  - extensive, re-written as a stub
 * 4) - minor, repaired
 * 5) - OK
 * 6) - OK (had been heavily copypasted early on but had been fixed by subsequent editors)
 * 7)  - OK
 * 8) - OK
 * 9) - minor, repaired
 * 10)  - OK
 * 11)  - extensive, re-written at Talk:Lake George Opera/Temp
 * 12)  - OK
 * 13) - repaired
 * 14) - OK
 * 15) - OK
 * 16) - OK
 * 17) - OK
 * 18)  – repaired
 * 19) - OK
 * 20)  - extensive, re-written at Talk:Portland Opera/Temp
 * 21)  - repaired

Opera singers, composers, librettists, etc.

 * 1) - OK
 * 2)  - OK
 * 3)  - OK
 * 4) - appears to be a close, but not exact, translation of the German site referenced
 * 5) - OK
 * 6) - partial check; does not copy cited online sources. Re-checked - OK Voceditenore (talk) 12:48, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * 7) - repaired; about half was uncomfortably close to SF Chronicle obit
 * 8) - repaired
 * 9) - repaired
 * 10) - reparied
 * 11) - OK
 * 12) - OK
 * 13) - extensive, stubbed
 * 14) - OK

Singing competitions

 * 1) - repaired

Voice and Singing

 * 1) - appears OK based on review of Nrswanson's contributions, all apparently minor
 * 2) - Nrswanson contributed only to "vocal registration."  At least one sentence was definitely a crib, and the rest sounded suspicious; rewrote section.
 * 3) - Nrswanson/Broadweighbabe contributed substantively only to the "controvery" section, sourced to printed references; now rewritten.
 * 4) - Nrswanson made limited substantive contributions, now rewritten.
 * 5) - Rewrote text, presumably neutralizing Nrswanson's extensive contributions.

Participants
indicates a participant with access to the Grove reference works. (Add Increase next to your name if this is the case.)
 * 1) Voceditenore (talk) 11:59, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:52, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 3)  Antandrus  (talk) 14:08, 4 October 2009 (UTC) (occasional participant)

User:Tempodivalse
I've noticed this user nominate an article for dyk. The article in question references German sources and I'm concerned about elements being a translation/close paraphrase. Does anyoen know if this user has been checkusered agianst known Swanson clones? Their earliest contrubutions suggest previous use of Wikipedia.--Peter cohen (talk) 14:48, 17 November 2009 (UTC)


 * He didn't turn up on the check-user in October and had already been editing for over a year, so clearly not from the same IP. It's possible that Swanson had created some "socks in reserve" from another IP a year ago. But they'd be impossible to connect to his original account(s) via checkuser. The evidence would have to be based on editing patterns, and I can't find any real similarity, apart from close paraprasing from a German source in a DYK article. I must say though, that I also find myself getting suspicious about every new user, especially ones that show evidence of close paraphrase. I'm keeping an eye on further contributions from this user, for example. S/he was creating articles like this. Voceditenore (talk) 08:29, 18 November 2009 (UTC)