Talk:Cocoa Research Institute of Nigeria

Possible copyvio?

I'm concerned that the statements in the Vision and Mission section are copyvios in that have been copied and barely modified, without attribution, from the organization's mission and vision page.

The article as originally written (this section has remained unchanged) says:

The vision of the CRIN is to be a citadel of excellence and international standard in the research and developments of cocoa, coffee, kola and Tea. The mission is to apply modern scientific techniques to promote the production of value added products of cocoa, kola, coffee and tea.

and the organization's page says:

Vision

To be a centre of excellence of international repute in the Research and Development of Cocoa, Kola, Cashew, Coffee and Tea.

Mission

To apply modern science to enhance the production of value-added products of Cocoa, Kola, Cashew, Coffee and Tea,

The differences between the original and this article are:

• add intros to the sentences ("the vision of CRIN is" and "The mission is")
• changed "centre" to "citadel"
• changed "repute" to "standard"
• removed cashew from the list
• changed some capitalization and removed hyphen in "value-added"

Because these appear to be minor changes and the sentences are essentially the same as in the original, I think they might be WP:COPYVIOs. However, I'm not completely sure about that so I don't want to tag the article for deletion. @DGG: can you please provide your opinion? Thanks. Ca2james (talk) 16:42, 28 September 2014 (UTC) Comment:There are significant differences between the two texts above. I can not coin a different Vision and Mission for CRIN. Every information on wikipedia is based on existing fact (but can only be significantly modify which I have done). However, the major information about the mission and vision cannot be skip. Such as research and developments of cocoa, coffee, kola and Tea. which you may probably expect me to modify. I want to let you know that, I have no other name I can call cocoa, coffee, kola and Tea apart from the botanical name. Also Research and Developments are two key words in that text.I don't think there should be problems with that. I guess you assume possible copyvio simply because I had an history of copyvio. Your assumption could be right but not in this case. @DGG: and @OccultZone: what can you say about this? Wikicology (talk) 17:28, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

@FreeRangeFrog: your opinion is needed sir. Thanks.Wikicology (talk) 17:44, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

The easiest way of handling this is by quoting these statements, instead of rewriting them. However, I question the need for both, as they say the same thing. The article title needs to be changed also, to Cocoa Research Institute of Nigeria" as we do not include the acronym in the title. I've done this. DGG ( talk ) 01:30, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

DGG, you wrote that comment on the original Talk page so I copied and pasted it here. I hope that's ok.

Thanks for looking into this and moving the pages. I wasn't sure whether there was any copyvio issues with those sentences and I'm pleased to know that they're ok (although they could use rewriting(. Sorry for the confusion, Wikicology. Ca2james (talk) 02:43, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

You are welcome, Ca2james. Am aware that you were a bit confused earlier. In my opinion if a section of an article or few lines of an article is suspected of a possible copyvio, I think the best thing to do is to fix the problems, either by editing to remove such content or cleanup of the section if necessary rather than tagging the entire article for deletion. Tagging an entire article for deletion simply because a section or few lines of the article contains copyvio won't help wikipedia in anyway. At times the copyvio content might not even be added by the article creator but by certain editor that feel such information should be included from their point of view. Modification or remover of such content will be a better idea. This opinion is based on your earlier comment which stated that: I'm not completely sure about that so I don't want to tag the article for deletion. Please don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that you had done anything wrong for bringing it up here. In fact I appreciated the fact that you bring it here and I had learnt what I never knew about mission statement today. Thank you so much Ca2james.

Before I saw this, I removed the mission and vision per WP:MISSION because they really didn't add information to the entry related to why the organization is unique. I am okay if someone disagrees with that though. EricEnfermero ^HOWDY! 08:01, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

I think I understand why DGG said it could be quoted, perhaps like The institute mission statement state that the institute objective is to conduct research in Cocoa, tea and so on but even with that I don't think it passes any useful messages, which DGG tried to point out as well. I think EricEnfermero is right for its remover per WP:MISSION. There are some articles that contain such statement, I think I will check through other article which similar issue.Wikicology (talk) 16:26, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Ref

orientnewspaper.com is at best a dead link (at worst hijacked for nefarious purposes).

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 03:39, 3 April 2016 (UTC).

I have removed other refs which were not relevant. This leaves two dead refs, of which I think I will also remove one, leaving the link to CRIN which claims it is down temporarily.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 03:59, 3 April 2016 (UTC).