→Copyvio: add source url, seems to have gone missing in subsequent edits. Add a note on WP:PARAPHRASE; it's not a policy page |
|||
Line 49: | Line 49: | ||
{{ping|Diannaa}} [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wartime_sexual_violence&type=revision&diff=822333440&oldid=822329597] This edit seems to be a copy of [https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/INDIA935.PDF this], can you double check please, [[User:Darkness Shines|Darkness Shines]] ([[User talk:Darkness Shines|talk]]) 19:48, 25 January 2018 (UTC) |
{{ping|Diannaa}} [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wartime_sexual_violence&type=revision&diff=822333440&oldid=822329597] This edit seems to be a copy of [https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/INDIA935.PDF this], can you double check please, [[User:Darkness Shines|Darkness Shines]] ([[User talk:Darkness Shines|talk]]) 19:48, 25 January 2018 (UTC) |
||
:There is no copyvio here, show examples <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User: 39.46.160.174| 39.46.160.174]] ([[User talk: 39.46.160.174#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/ 39.46.160.174|contribs]]) </small> |
:<s>There is no copyvio here, show examples <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User: 39.46.160.174| 39.46.160.174]] ([[User talk: 39.46.160.174#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/ 39.46.160.174|contribs]]) </small></s> |
||
:Some is copyvio and some is not. The part that's copyvio is from "Human Rights Watch Report from 1992" to the end of the paragraph. The rest of the addition does not appear to be supported by the citation provided. — [[User:Diannaa|Diannaa]] <span style="color:red">🍁</span> ([[User talk:Diannaa|talk]]) 20:03, 25 January 2018 (UTC) |
:Some is copyvio and some is not. The part that's copyvio is from "Human Rights Watch Report from 1992" to the end of the paragraph. The rest of the addition does not appear to be supported by the citation provided. — [[User:Diannaa|Diannaa]] <span style="color:red">🍁</span> ([[User talk:Diannaa|talk]]) 20:03, 25 January 2018 (UTC) |
||
::Thank you Diannaa, I've requested PP due to this sock repeatedly adding it. [[User:Darkness Shines|Darkness Shines]] ([[User talk:Darkness Shines|talk]]) 20:11, 25 January 2018 (UTC) |
::Thank you Diannaa, I've requested PP due to this sock repeatedly adding it. [[User:Darkness Shines|Darkness Shines]] ([[User talk:Darkness Shines|talk]]) 20:11, 25 January 2018 (UTC) |
||
According to WP I read, socking allegations without SPI are considered harassment, Darkness Shines. As for D4iNa4, making vague claims like that is insufficient, you need to provide examples, like show the sentences. I would not be surprised if you are lying again though, because you put a false edit summary when you removed the longstanding content by claiming it was added by a sock when it was not. [[Special:Contributions/39.46.185.8|39.46.185.8]] ([[User talk:39.46.185.8|talk]]) 20:15, 25 January 2018 (UTC) |
<s>According to WP I read, socking allegations without SPI are considered harassment, Darkness Shines. As for D4iNa4, making vague claims like that is insufficient, you need to provide examples, like show the sentences. I would not be surprised if you are lying again though, because you put a false edit summary when you removed the longstanding content by claiming it was added by a sock when it was not. [[Special:Contributions/39.46.185.8|39.46.185.8]] ([[User talk:39.46.185.8|talk]]) 20:15, 25 January 2018 (UTC) |
||
Here's the article text |
Here's the article text |
||
Line 64: | Line 64: | ||
use of rape is common and routinely goes unpunished. </blockquote> |
use of rape is common and routinely goes unpunished. </blockquote> |
||
Anyone can see there is no copyright violation here. [[Special:Contributions/39.46.185.8|39.46.185.8]] ([[User talk:39.46.185.8|talk]]) 20:26, 25 January 2018 (UTC) |
Anyone can see there is no copyright violation here. [[Special:Contributions/39.46.185.8|39.46.185.8]] ([[User talk:39.46.185.8|talk]]) 20:26, 25 January 2018 (UTC)</s> Strike blatant Faizan sock. [[User:D4iNa4|D4iNa4]] ([[User talk:D4iNa4|talk]]) |
||
:Except two people say it is a copyvio, so just stop now Faizan [[User:Darkness Shines|Darkness Shines]] ([[User talk:Darkness Shines|talk]]) 20:50, 25 January 2018 (UTC) |
:Except two people say it is a copyvio, so just stop now Faizan [[User:Darkness Shines|Darkness Shines]] ([[User talk:Darkness Shines|talk]]) 20:50, 25 January 2018 (UTC) |
||
::I think the paraphrase could be a little less close, but I don't see it as clear a copyvio as you consider it. Rewriting would be better than outright removal, I think. --[[User talk:SarekOfVulcan|<span class="gfSarekSig">SarekOfVulcan (talk)</span>]] 21:02, 25 January 2018 (UTC) |
::I think the paraphrase could be a little less close, but I don't see it as clear a copyvio as you consider it. Rewriting would be better than outright removal, I think. --[[User talk:SarekOfVulcan|<span class="gfSarekSig">SarekOfVulcan (talk)</span>]] 21:02, 25 January 2018 (UTC) |
||
Line 72: | Line 72: | ||
:::::I agree with {{u|Diannaa}}'s conclusions here. The English Wikipedia copyright policy is significantly stricter than required by the laws of the United States, both as it is written and in how we enforce it: the sentence structure and wording are too close, and there are other ways it reasonably could be written so as not to require close paraphrase. There is enough content here that is similar in structure and wording to be in violation of the en.wiki policy, and I also suspect the laws of the United States (INAL). It is borderline as to whether or not it needs revision deletion, and I will defer to Diannaa on that. [[User:TonyBallioni|TonyBallioni]] ([[User talk:TonyBallioni|talk]]) 21:55, 25 January 2018 (UTC) |
:::::I agree with {{u|Diannaa}}'s conclusions here. The English Wikipedia copyright policy is significantly stricter than required by the laws of the United States, both as it is written and in how we enforce it: the sentence structure and wording are too close, and there are other ways it reasonably could be written so as not to require close paraphrase. There is enough content here that is similar in structure and wording to be in violation of the en.wiki policy, and I also suspect the laws of the United States (INAL). It is borderline as to whether or not it needs revision deletion, and I will defer to Diannaa on that. [[User:TonyBallioni|TonyBallioni]] ([[User talk:TonyBallioni|talk]]) 21:55, 25 January 2018 (UTC) |
||
:::::[[WP:PARAPHRASE]] is not a policy page, it's supplementary info. The actual policy calls for removal of any and all copyvio. — [[User:Diannaa|Diannaa]] <span style="color:red">🍁</span> ([[User talk:Diannaa|talk]]) 14:40, 26 January 2018 (UTC) |
:::::[[WP:PARAPHRASE]] is not a policy page, it's supplementary info. The actual policy calls for removal of any and all copyvio. — [[User:Diannaa|Diannaa]] <span style="color:red">🍁</span> ([[User talk:Diannaa|talk]]) 14:40, 26 January 2018 (UTC) |
||
{{od}} |
|||
Copyvio or not, Faizan is on verge of getting sitebanned for his deceitful meat puppetry and socking, none of his content needs to be restored and should be reverted on sight. Internal conflicts cannot be classified as war, that's why Syrian civil war, [[Balochistan insurgency]], Myanmar Rohingya conflict are not included here either. [[User:D4iNa4|D4iNa4]] ([[User talk:D4iNa4|talk]]) 17:41, 26 January 2018 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:42, 26 January 2018
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): AD510621, Anonymous2018 (article contribs).
Useful Sources
Copyvio
@Diannaa: [2] This edit seems to be a copy of this, can you double check please, Darkness Shines (talk) 19:48, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
There is no copyvio here, show examples — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.46.160.174 (talk • contribs)- Some is copyvio and some is not. The part that's copyvio is from "Human Rights Watch Report from 1992" to the end of the paragraph. The rest of the addition does not appear to be supported by the citation provided. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:03, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you Diannaa, I've requested PP due to this sock repeatedly adding it. Darkness Shines (talk) 20:11, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
According to WP I read, socking allegations without SPI are considered harassment, Darkness Shines. As for D4iNa4, making vague claims like that is insufficient, you need to provide examples, like show the sentences. I would not be surprised if you are lying again though, because you put a false edit summary when you removed the longstanding content by claiming it was added by a sock when it was not. 39.46.185.8 (talk) 20:15, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
Here's the article text
Human Rights Watch Report from 1992, Rape in Kashmir: A Crime Of War, states that there are no reliable statistics on the number of rapes committed by the Indian security forces in Kashmir because a significant number of the rapes by Indian security forces have been perpetrated in isolated rural areas of Kashmir which makes it difficult to document all the cases. However, the Human Rights Watch Report states that the use of rape is common and the perpetrators are not punished.
here's the source text
There are no reliable statistics on the number of rapes committed by security forces in Kashmir.
Human rights groups have documented many cases since 1990, but because many of the incidents have occurred in remote villages, it is impossible to confirm any precise number. There can be no doubt that the
use of rape is common and routinely goes unpunished.
Anyone can see there is no copyright violation here. 39.46.185.8 (talk) 20:26, 25 January 2018 (UTC) Strike blatant Faizan sock. D4iNa4 (talk)
- Except two people say it is a copyvio, so just stop now Faizan Darkness Shines (talk) 20:50, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
- I think the paraphrase could be a little less close, but I don't see it as clear a copyvio as you consider it. Rewriting would be better than outright removal, I think. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:02, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
- Diannaa is pretty good with copyvio stuff, given what she said the edit as it stands cannot go back in, first section copyvio of the HRW pdf the rest apparently made up as not supported. And I can't rewrite it, I'm TBanned from it. Darkness Shines (talk) 21:13, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
- It presents the same material in the same order using almost identical wording. It's a copyright violation in my opinion. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:27, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
- Per WP:PARAPHRASE,
Limited close paraphrasing is appropriate within reason, as is quoting, so long as the material is clearly attributed in the text
. Considering this is a single paragraph from a 21-page report, and it's attributed twice, I think it's acceptable. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:41, 25 January 2018 (UTC)- I agree with Diannaa's conclusions here. The English Wikipedia copyright policy is significantly stricter than required by the laws of the United States, both as it is written and in how we enforce it: the sentence structure and wording are too close, and there are other ways it reasonably could be written so as not to require close paraphrase. There is enough content here that is similar in structure and wording to be in violation of the en.wiki policy, and I also suspect the laws of the United States (INAL). It is borderline as to whether or not it needs revision deletion, and I will defer to Diannaa on that. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:55, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
- WP:PARAPHRASE is not a policy page, it's supplementary info. The actual policy calls for removal of any and all copyvio. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:40, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
- Per WP:PARAPHRASE,
- I think the paraphrase could be a little less close, but I don't see it as clear a copyvio as you consider it. Rewriting would be better than outright removal, I think. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:02, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
Copyvio or not, Faizan is on verge of getting sitebanned for his deceitful meat puppetry and socking, none of his content needs to be restored and should be reverted on sight. Internal conflicts cannot be classified as war, that's why Syrian civil war, Balochistan insurgency, Myanmar Rohingya conflict are not included here either. D4iNa4 (talk) 17:41, 26 January 2018 (UTC)