Talk:Irek Hamidullin
Latest comment: 10 years ago by Crow in topic Misplaced copyvio concern
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Misplaced copyvio concern
editI received a heads-up that the article Irek Hamidullan was a copyvio. Impressive that I received this heads-up almost instantly.
But the concern is misplaced:
- The default license at the site the robot thought was being inappropriately copied is public domain.
- I was the sole author of the article. Geo Swan (talk) 02:43, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Geo Swan, yes the bot only understands content, not context. Question though, was that article originally on WP (as that site says it is heavily comprised of deleted WP articles)? CrowCaw 22:05, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
- Yes the site is heavily comprised of deleted WP articles. However, there are several dozen articles I first drafted there, where there are looser standards as to what can be included, and which I ported to the wikipedia when additional references were published, which would make it more likely for the article to withstand a challenge over notability.
- I don't know why those earlier ports didn't trigger the attention of the bot. Geo Swan (talk) 04:22, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
- Ok thanks, I sort of figured that was the case. Anything created there first seems to be OK, but they are mis-licensing content they pull from here. I can bore you if you wish, but long story short (too late!) I think we're good here. Thanks for the explanation and the article itself! CrowCaw 23:15, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
- I don't know why those earlier ports didn't trigger the attention of the bot. Geo Swan (talk) 04:22, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Geo Swan, yes the bot only understands content, not context. Question though, was that article originally on WP (as that site says it is heavily comprised of deleted WP articles)? CrowCaw 22:05, 31 October 2014 (UTC)