Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Gastropods/Subpage listing additional suspected CopyVio articles by GB

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

April 2009 onwards:

After working through this list, please plan to check quickly to examine the status of related articles that are linked in the article, such as species genera or family articles, because many of these may also have copyvio.

Also please check the rest of the master list as many others remain in that list. Those listed here were extracted from the first quarter of the list at [1]. (These are all articles that were not included in the category Molluscs of New Zealand, or Molluscs of Australia, and they have not been tagged by a bot for possible copyvio. A lot of these artices were not tagged as being in Project Gastropods.)

If you find extra articles that need fixing or that you did fix (ones that did not already have the copyvio tag), please add them to this list.

I reorganized the list alphabetically for ease of use. Invertzoo (talk) 20:13, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

List of additional gastropod articles needing checking[edit]


Anyone who attempts to check these articles needs to bear in mind that a great deal of the copyvio was taken from books which are not available on-line, and thus googling for a phrase and not finding it is not sufficient to ensure that it is not copied.

1. The most likely section to be copied verbatim is the "Description" section. "Habitat'" and "Range" sections may also be copied verbatim or almost verbatim. Note that it is not necessary to actually rewrite copyvio sections at this stage; the highest priority is to remove copyvio material. Instead of re-writing, you can just remove the offending sections altogether or render them invisible. (If however you very much want to rewrite a section, and you are confident that you can do a good job of this, because both your prose skills and your understanding are up to the task, then feel free to do so. Remember that a light paraphrasing is not enough to remove copyvio status.)

2. When you remove a copyvio section, note that in the edit summary, and also say "see talk page".

3. On the talk page of the article, place an explanation message as is shown here: [2]. This should help to prevent people adding back in any unimproved text from the copyvio section.

4. If it is a gastropod article which has no project gastropod template, please add one. If it has a gastropod template but the class now needs adjusting from start to stub, do so.

List: A to M[edit]

List: M to Z[edit]

Other mollusk articles started by GB[edit]

NOTE: Remember this is not a complete extract from the main list. I stopped less than a quarter of the way through the main list because I was getting tired. Invertzoo (talk) 21:05, 14 March 2009 (UTC) There are plenty more on the main bot-created list to extract and add to these lists. See [3]

Note to editors who have worked on this list[edit]

Those of you who do not have access to a copy of Powell's book, which appears to have been GB's primary source and which is not available on-line, how are you determining that there is no CopyVio? Please answer here to let us know, thanks, Invertzoo (talk) 15:46, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, in the two I checked, Calliostoma and Buccinidae, there was only a general opening followed by the species lists; no detailed descriptions, which seem to constitute most of the problem if I understand properly. Let me know if I misunderstand the situation. Tim Ross (talk) 16:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
In the Calliostoma article, I personally would want to check this sentence "The name of this genus is derived from the Greek words kallos (beautiful) and stoma (mouth), referring to the pearly aperture" against the relevant text in the Powell book, assuming that sentence was one of GB's edits. The Buccinidae article is probably fine as it stands though.
In general only the very first sentence of these articles is good to go, the rest of the text of an intro may often be quite suspect, especially when the prose sounds sort of elegant and a little bit antiquated. Thanks for replying and very best wishes to you, Invertzoo (talk) 22:24, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the insight. I do wish I had Powell's book here! Unchecked that listing. Tim Ross (talk) 09:08, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Anyone else want to reply?
That phrase in Calliostoma is mine. I've been adding some general description and many more species to the list of this extremely large genus. JoJan (talk) 16:50, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
OK, good, thanks JoJan for telling us that. Best, Invertzoo (talk) 17:34, 18 March 2009 (UTC)