|
SCV for 2011-03-31 Edit
Copyright investigations (manual article tagging)[edit]- Rotation_around_a_fixed_axis (history · last edit) from [1] and [2], and maybe other books. The copyvio was done in May, 2007 by user:Rsfontenot in this edit [3] to Rotational motion. [Note, the date of the Serway book is 2008, but I don't think that means it was copied from Wikipedia; I think 2008 is just the earliest edition of this textbook that Google books has. The other plagiarized source definitely predates Wikipedia.] The Rotational motion page was merged to Rotation_around_a_fixed_axis by me, long ago. At the time, I did not detect a copyvio.
There are some other big copyvios on Rotation_around_a_fixed_axis from the same editor, who has since been blocked for unrelated misbehavior. For example, this edit overlaps with this snippet from Google books. Given time, I could rewrite them all out of existence, but I have other demands on my time, and it might take me a while to do that, so I thought I would report this here. Cardamon (talk) 05:33, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for bringing up your concerns. You're almost certainly correct, since the book you link is the 8th edition. I see that you have been addressing the concerns since making this note here, but I'm afraid that such incremental changes can frequently create derivative works, and I'm afraid that's a bit of what's going on here. :/ We still have the same structure as the source--some of the same examples and the same order of arguments--strung together with remaining bits of the information. And I can't see one of the books at all. It may be best to blank out and rewrite those portions entirely in your own words, if you feel up to it. I'll ask another admin to take a look. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:03, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
-
-
- I agree that I did not yet succeed in eliminating the copyvio. (I was thinking about two more passes through the material would do it.) I would like to note that the equations and the arguments are pretty standard from one textbook to another, with the main difference between textbooks being the level they are written at. (The examples tend to be individual.) Still, maybe it would be safest to simply delete everything that editor contributed to either of those pages, including diagrams. Either way, I won't be up for any much rewriting until after April 18. Cardamon (talk) 20:27, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I've deleted everything in that chunk of text except some of the equations (which were generic), the section titles (which also were generic and, as far as I can see, weren't copied), and the reference. Hopefully that got all of it. I'll mention this on the Physics Wikiproject. Cardamon (talk) 00:55, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you very much. :) I'm glad that you'll be able to help with cleanup there; I'm afraid that article would be quite beyond me! --Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:36, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
|
