Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2009 April 16

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

16 April 2009

What portion of the article is a violation? The article's first draft cites this book as a source for the first paragraph. If the first paragraph is copied word-for-word it can be removed and the rest restored. Chubbles (talk) 13:08, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
By selective keyword entry in Google Books, it is clear that, indeed, the first paragraph only need be removed as a violation. Chubbles (talk) 13:51, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I checked this book and the first paragraph of the Biography section is indeed almost word for word copy from it. However, the rest of the article isn't. Just delete the first paragraph, and everything should be okay. --Sumori (talk) 17:36, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Any objections to me just going ahead and
doing that? I'd like to expedite this process if possible. Chubbles (talk) 14:50, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
I'm afraid this one has somewhat more extensive problems. The second paragraph also infringes; see [3]. I see duplication both in the vibrant, versatility descriptors but even more extensively in the area of "Sarah's powerful, commanding vocal style...." I haven't checked the third paragraph to see it infringes on anything, but we might need to overhaul that article just to be sure, since the creator evidently copied from at least two sources. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:55, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, want to just kill the bio and leave the skeleton? I can throw in a couple sentences of new prose. Chubbles (talk) 15:30, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That might be the best approach. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:44, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. Chubbles (talk) 16:15, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Searching this volume on Google Books for Big Walter Horton returns no hits. Chubbles (talk) 13:41, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No evidence of violation; see above under Big Time Sarah. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:46, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]