Bogdan Giusca wrote:
I noticed that there's a user who is making minor changes, then adds a template which links his website, claiming that the article uses content from his website:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Routledge&diff=59143473&ol... http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Palpitation&diff=next&oldi... http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pain_disorder&diff=57152420&am... http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Emotion_and_memory&diff=589126... etc.
He also created some pages on his wiki, then he copy-pasted them to wikipedia, while adding the same template.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selfcare_skills http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flooding_(therapy) etc.
Do we have a policy against this? I mean, everyone could claim that his new articles were first published on his website and each such page would have a spam link to a website. (links from Wikipedia are very useful for increasing the Google PR)
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Comparing the histories of the articles shows that Wikipedia's were the original. The psychwiki pages also have many redlinks in the same places the Wikipedia articles have valid links.
I'm still not very well versed in Wikipedia's policies like most people here, but I think this practice should be prohibited. Even though Wikipedia's articles are free to be used by anybody, this person is claiming Wikipedia editors took content from his wiki, which is not the case. In my opinion, it looks like a way to advertise that wiki.