Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/FuzzyMagma

< Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations

This page has been removed from search engines' indexes.

Contributor copyright investigation

This CCI cleanup subpage has been opened because concerns of repeated copyright violations from the listed contributor have been substantiated and further review of contributions is necessary. Listings are not intended to imply a presumption of bad faith on the part of any contributor, as copyright laws vary widely around the world and many contributors who violate Wikipedia's copyrights policy do so inadvertently through not understanding it or the United States' laws that govern it.

If you are here because of a note on an article's talk page explaining removal of text, please do not restore any removed text without first ensuring that the text does not duplicate, closely paraphrase or plagiarize from a previously published source. You are welcome to use sourced facts that may have been removed to create new content in your own words or to incorporate brief quotations of copyrighted material in accordance with the non-free content policy and guideline.

Instructions

edit

All contributors with no history of copyright problems are welcome to contribute to clean up. Contributors who are the subject of a contributor copyright investigation are among contributors with a history of copyright problems and so are not welcome to directly evaluate their own or others' copyright violations in CCIs. They are welcome to assist with rewriting any problems identified, and are encouraged to assist with accessing offline and paywalled sources.

If contributors have been shown to have a history of extensive copyright violation, it may be assumed without further evidence that all of their major contributions are copyright violations, and they may be removed indiscriminately in accordance with Wikipedia:Copyright violations. Contributors who are the subject of a contributor copyright investigation are among contributors who have been shown to have a history of extensive copyright violation and so all of the below listed contributions may be removed indiscriminately. However, to avoid collateral damage, efforts should be made when possible to verify infringement before removal.

When every section is completed, please alter the listing for this CCI at Template:CCIlist to include the tag "completed=yes". This will alert a clerk that the listing needs to be archived.

  • {{CCI-open|Contributor name|Day Month Year|completed=yes}}

Text

edit
  • Examine the article or the diffs linked below.
  • If the contributor has added creative content, either evaluate it carefully for copyright concerns or remove it.
  • Evaluating for copyright concerns may include checking the listed sources, spot-checking using search engines, google books, or archives, and looking for major differences in writing style. The background may give some indication of the kinds of copyright concerns that have been previously detected. For older text, mirrors of Wikipedia content may make determining which came first difficult. It may be helpful to look for significant changes to the text after it was entered. Searching for the earlier form of text can help eliminate later mirrors. If you cannot determine which came first, text should be removed presumptively, since there is an established history of copying with the editor in question.
  • If you remove large portions of text presumptively, place {{subst:CCI|name=Contributor name}} on the article's talk page.
  • If you specifically locate infringement and remove large portions of the text (or revert to a previous clean version), place {{subst:cclean}} on the article's talk page. The url parameter may be optionally used to indicate source.
  • If there is insufficient creative content on the page for it to survive the removal of the text or it is impossible to salvage, replace it with {{subst:copyvio}}, linking to the investigation subpage in the url parameter. List the article as instructed at the copyright problems board, but you do not need to notify the contributor. Your note on the CCI investigation page serves that purpose.
  • To tag an article created by the contributor for presumptive deletion, place {{subst:copyvio|url=see talk}} on the article's face and {{subst:CCId|name=Contributor name}} on the article's talk page. List the article as instructed at the copyright problems board, but you do not need to notify the contributor.
  • After examining an article:
  • replace the diffs after the colon on the listing with indication of whether a problem was found (add {{y}}) or not (add {{n}}). If the article is blanked and may be deleted, please indicate as much after the {{y}}. The {{?}} template may be used for articles where you did not determine whether or not a violation occurred, but are prepared to remove the article from consideration – either because the material is no longer present in the article, or it is adequately paraphrased so as to no longer be a violation (please specify which).
  • Follow with your username and the time to indicate to others that the article has been evaluated and appropriately addressed. This is automatically generated by four tildes (~~~~)
  • If a section is complete, consider collapsing it by placing {{collapse top}} and {{collapse bottom}} beneath the section header and after the final listing.

Background

edit

FuzzyMagma

edit
  • FuzzyMagma (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
  • Check requested by theleekycauldron (talk • she/her)
  • Request largely stems from the evidence presented at DYK's noticeboard by dying, following previously received warnings on copyright (1 2). Probably calls for a closer look. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 01:00, 25 November 2023 (UTC) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 01:00, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    When this last discussion started it was based on a similarity between two article in Wikipedia (i.e., September 1983 Laws and National Reconciliation (Sudan)) to stop an article from being included on the main page as part of DYK. Once that was dismissed, a new argument linked to a different article came forth (i.e., Islamism in Sudan). During that discussion I was accused of "personally attacking an editor" and asked to "drop the stick" by the admin in this nom and another editor.
    I choose to just "shut up and edit" and fixed the article which I believed did not need to be fixed to start with, but I did it anyway to end this matter. To my surprise, dying launched a clear personal attack and got applauded by the current nom admin. Then the whole thing spiralled to an examination of my work when dying is claiming that they picked from my 211 articles one at "random" (i.e., Kalakla) and finding problems with them while pointing to an incident that happened at Republican Palace, Khartoum.
    I refused to engage because I knew it is futile as the goal post is kept moving however I tried to approach it, see the discussion at Template:Did you know nominations/September 1983 Laws.
    However, if any one bothered to have a look to the Talk:Republican Palace, Khartoum#CopyVio they would have found what was the issue (confusion about free licence) which was resolved then. Kalakla which was translated from the Arabic article as mentioned in the page talk. Same for Sara Gadalla Gubara
    Just to make it clear, I am not saying that I have not made mistakes, I have made plenty but the tune that was used on that DYK thread does not help in anyway.
    The nom admin might not remember this, but I had an article pulled at the last moment (i.e., Child abuse in association football) mainly for NPOV and I admitted as being not my strongest suits. The article was moved to the draft space and with the help of these editors comments, I was able to improve the article, as this is the aim of the whole reviewing process, is to improve the quality of the work.
    But when someone using a language like "trying to give you a decent out.", "reputational damage", "as a favor to you", "because otherwise, anyone running afoul of wp:dyksplit (or wp:dyk5x) could easily launder their article by simply paraphrasing the copied material after the issue is pointed out to them", and in general a very accusatory and proactive, I just chose to disengage as I cannot with a good conscious improve my work when I am being berated, if - by by pure chance - these attacks revealed something true. Please be aware that I declined to interact with dying, and I intend to maintain that decision. Based on our two previous interactions, I believe that constantly pivoting when proven wrong is not a constructive approach to a discussion and will only prolong it unnecessarily.
    Anyway, I will leave you to investigate but thought the context might be important here FuzzyMagma (talk) 10:14, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FuzzyMagma

edit

Pages 1 to 20

edit

Pages 21 to 40

edit

Pages 41 to 60

edit

Pages 61 to 80

edit

Pages 81 to 100

edit

Pages 101 to 120

edit

Pages 121 to 140

edit

Pages 141 to 160

edit

Pages 161 to 180

edit

Pages 181 to 200

edit

Pages 201 to 220

edit

Pages 221 to 240

edit

Pages 241 to 260

edit

Pages 261 to 280

edit

Pages 281 to 300

edit

Pages 301 to 320

edit

Pages 321 to 340

edit

Pages 341 to 360

edit

Pages 361 to 380

edit

Pages 381 to 385

edit
only minor edits, all good Broc (talk) 15:29, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This report generated by ContributionSurveyor.java at 2024-01-13T11:37:41.586191742Z. Command line: java org.wikipedia.tools.ContributionSurveyor --user FuzzyMagma --outfile dump.txt

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Contributor_copyright_investigations/FuzzyMagma&oldid=1233342178"
  NODES
admin 3
Association 3
INTERN 4
Note 3
Project 1
Verify 1