Wikipedia talk:Contributor copyright investigations

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Backlog back to 2010[edit]

I recently tagged an article as copyright violation and over the copyright issues encountered this site. This page has a massive backlog back to 2010 and is thus obviously not working. Removal of copyright violations, however, definitely has to work. A localized discussion here will simply not work so I will skip the steps at WP:RFC and make a RFC directly:

How do we fix this backlog and make sure it doesn't come back again?Lurking shadow (talk) 21:37, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

  • Deprecate venue and tag {{historical}}. The scope is a fork of ANI. We don't have a specific venue for other specific issues, and urgent copyright issues are dealt with in other ways. This is unfortunately out of date. wumbolo ^^^ 22:07, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • This is a very important function, and one we see very frequently here on WP. I think it does need it's own venue but needs to be active. Could the grunt work be automated somehow? --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:14, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
    I have a means of reducing the number of diffs in new CCIs by about 10%. I'm running it now as I fill out the September 2018 cases. MER-C 11:56, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Closing the venue won't make the problem go away. What's really needed is proper detection and blocking of copyright violators (as in, admins should always block indefinitely for copyvios) and their sockpuppets and always using presumptive removal when socks are involved. MER-C 11:56, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support measures to 1. always indefinitely(not necessarily infinitely e.g. unblock after discussion with blocking admin) block editors for violating copyright, to 2. remove all contributions of copyright violators with more than 4 copyright violations and more than 10 edits under presumptive removal, 3. to permanently and automatically siteban all people who were warned and/or blocked for copyright violations more than twice(excluding illegitimate warnings or blocks) and 4., should first two measures be enacted, to mark this page historical.Lurking shadow (talk) 14:41, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
    Even if you do all those things (which cannot be guaranteed), one needs pages like this to track progress regarding presumptive removals. MER-C 21:00, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
    That's probably true.Lurking shadow (talk) 22:33, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose the idea of closing this is nuts. First off, the number of active admins who are actually somewhat knowledgeable with how Wikipedia handles text copyright can be counted on your fingers. Sending this to ANI is crazy. Also, there is a backlog, yes, but its better that it exists than doesn't exist: at least there is something to organize and track this problem. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:47, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
    • The question how to handle the backlog remains, then. Not doing anything is hardly a valid option.Lurking shadow (talk) 20:54, 17 November 2018 (UTC)