-----Original Message----- From: Gurch [mailto:matthew.britton@btinternet.com] Sent: Friday, February 9, 2007 07:47 PM To: 'English Wikipedia' Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] expunging copyright violations (Was: Re: Admin burnout)
John Vandenberg wrote:
On 2/10/07, Guettarda guettarda@gmail.com wrote: ... I expect that this would require an "Request for Expunction" process, which amounts to more bureaucracy, but if its creation allows for more admins, the net effect is fewer backlogs.
Is something like this possible with the current MediaWiki and dump creation software?
-- John
This is pretty much just http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Oversight, is it not?
-Gurch
The mission of Oversight would need to be expanded to deal with copyright violations. Right now it covers only posting of sensitive personal information. Currently copyright violations are simply replaced, usually not even deleted. Oversight hides even from administrators. Would that be necessary or appropriate?
Fred
On 2/10/07, Fred Bauder fredbaud@waterwiki.info wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Gurch [mailto:matthew.britton@btinternet.com] Sent: Friday, February 9, 2007 07:47 PM To: 'English Wikipedia' Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] expunging copyright violations (Was: Re: Admin burnout)
John Vandenberg wrote:
On 2/10/07, Guettarda guettarda@gmail.com wrote: ... I expect that this would require an "Request for Expunction" process, which amounts to more bureaucracy, but if its creation allows for more admins, the net effect is fewer backlogs.
Is something like this possible with the current MediaWiki and dump creation software?
-- John
This is pretty much just http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Oversight, is it not?
I thought something like this should exist and went looking using words such as "expunction"; I should have tried "expunged". I'll go read up on it now.
-Gurch
The mission of Oversight would need to be expanded to deal with copyright violations. Right now it covers only posting of sensitive personal information. Currently copyright violations are simply replaced, usually not even deleted. Oversight hides even from administrators. Would that be necessary or appropriate?
WP:CP says that articles should be speedied if it cant be readily solved by reverting. In the three cases that I have come across copyrighted material that had a commercially interested source (e.g. EB), the articles were deleted. I think it is fair enough as well; the copyvio tag is essentially a prod, and if nobody does anything about it, the article can always be rewritten.
-- John