Help Wikitravel grow by contributing to an article! Learn how.

Template talk:Copyvio

From Wikitravel
Revision as of 18:43, 26 February 2009 by Peterfitzgerald (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Message text[edit]

I'd like to suggest changing the text of this message to address the user adding content and "kindly" ask them to check our policies before adding any more content. Maybe something along the lines of:

"The content of this page has been found to contain copyrighted material in violation of our Copyright policies. Please refer to our policies and guidelines before adding more content."

Should there also be something about how to release copyright to WT by making a note on the talk page, or does that just confuse the issue?

Comments? Majnoona 16:14, 21 Feb 2006 (EST)


I don't think that a release of copyright is really what we are after. All we need is a license. Specifically we need for the content which folks add to WT to be offered with a license which whose terms will be met by re-distributors of WT under the terms of our license. IANAL, please correct me if I am missing something. -- Mark 17:10, 21 Feb 2006 (EST)

Is this any better?[edit]

Err, an IP user changed the template text and I have to say, no, sorry, I don't think it's better ;-) I was hoping to work out the new wording here on the talk page, since it's a change that will show up on many pages. I'm going to roll it back and move the suggested text her for reworking. Majnoona 17:46, 21 Feb 2006 (EST)

OK, it looks like it was more than one edit, I'm not going to roll it back, but can it be shorter? How about:

   This page appears to contain content which is a copyright violation. 
   Please refer to our policies and guidelines before adding more content. 
   If you are the author of the content in question, please let us know that it's OK for us to use your work. 
   The content in question appears to have been appropriated from:-

It might not hurt to explain things in more detail on the policies & guidelines page if folks think there needs to be more explination. Majnoona 17:50, 21 Feb 2006 (EST)

Yes, the "is this any better?" edit was very much prompted by the three edits that immediately preceded it. FWIW the proposed shorter version looks good to me.
Or:
   This page appears to contain content which is a copyright violation. 
   Please refer to our policies and guidelines before adding more content. 
    
   If you are the author of the content in question, please let us know that it's OK for us to use your work. 
    
   The content in question appears to have been appropriated from:-
it's a change that will show up on many pages - it's currently only on three article pages, but also on eight "talk" pages - which is correct?
see http://wikitravel.org/wiki/en/index.php?title=Special:Whatlinkshere&target=Template%3ACopyvio
Uh, could you login or create a user account? thanks. Anyway, I was speaking more in general re:template content changes. Some of the other templates are used in thousands of articles so I dont think the usual "plunge forward" mentality holds here... but I'll go ahead and make the edits I'd like to see... Majnoona 20:01, 21 Feb 2006 (EST)

Updating this template[edit]

Proposed update:

Advantages:

  • This template has a border, so it stands out. See Guayaquil for an example of how easily the current template blends in.
  • The source URL is included in the template, making it more likely that anyone using this template will include it.
  • Information is provided about how to resolve a copyvio and there are also links to explain what a copyvio is for those who don't understand.

Would anyone be opposed to updating this template with the above text? Assuming that this isn't too controversial of a change, I'll make the change soon unless there are concerns raised. -- Ryan 15:50, 12 April 2006 (EDT)

Minor quibble: I changed "appears to contain content that is a..." to "contains content that appears to be...". There's no question of what's on the page; the question is whether what's there is OK to use.
Otherwise, no objection. One proposed upgrade for the future: maybe we should have Template:copyvioimage and Template:copyviotext, so that we could drop the kind of abstract word "content" for more concrete (well, slightly more concrete) "image" or "text". --Evan 20:42, 12 April 2006 (EDT)
I wouldn't be opposed to splitting image/text copyvio templates, although for now I think that the new template should be an improvement over the old one, which is more or less invisible to me (see Guayaquil), and which provides no info on how to resolve the problem. I'll update it shortly - articles that include the current template will also need to be updated since the URL is now included. -- Ryan 20:55, 12 April 2006 (EDT)

VFDing Copyvios[edit]

It seems the great majority of suspected copyvios are also vfd'd. Is there any chance we can merge the vfd and copyvio templates to include a link to the vfd page. -- Sapphire 05:53, 22 September 2006 (EDT)

I don't have much of an opinion, but it's worth noting that only copyvio images are usually vfd'd. The text in copyvio articles is usually just removed from an article. -- Ryan 05:56, 22 September 2006 (EDT)
True, maybe creating the {{copyvioimage}} template would be wise and use the current template for text. -- Sapphire 05:58, 22 September 2006 (EDT)

Usefulness[edit]

This template seems like a straightforwardly bad idea to me. If someone comes across a copyright violation, they should remove it. We use templates like these for suggested merges as well, and those usually get left up for years before a merge happens (if it ever happens). We should not be leaving copyright violations, tagged or not, on our site, especially if someone's already detected it. --Peter Talk 13:39, 26 February 2009 (EST)

Variants

Actions

Destination Docents

In other languages