[WikiEN-l] NPG copyright irony

[Carcharoth]

It is possible they have used that text from someone else who has
taken it from Wikipedia. I sometimes find this in the line of work I
do, where people submit information on the items they submit to us
(with no indication of where this information has come from), and I
then double-check and sometimes find they have copied direct from
Wikipedia. It is how information can spread, sometimes. In this case,
of course, you would expect the curators of the NPG to do their own
research. One thing you (Scott) would need to check is precisely where
the sentences in the lead of the article came from and when they were
written.

I've been flicking forward from the initial version of the article here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Michael_Wright&oldid=180342440

It is clear that the current lead emerges gradually over time, with
changes in wording over time. You would need to identify the point in
times at which the word structure of the current sentences emerge and
who wrote them. Given that others have contributed to this article,
you would need to be sure that they did not contribute to the wording
of the copied text. If they did contribute, you would need to work
together with them on what action (if any) to take.

Carcharoth

On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 4:43 PM, Scott MacDonald
<doc.wikipedia at ntlworld.com> wrote:
> After the confrontation between Derrick Coetzee and the National Portrait
> Gallery, I thought people would enjoy this irony.
>
> I wandered on to this page of theirs on John Michael Wright:
>
> http://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/person.php?search=sa&LinkID=mp07767
> &role=art&wPage=0
>
> Hm, that description of Wright sounds familiar I though. Unsurprising
> really, since *I* wrote it.
>
> It is taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Michael_Wright which is
> mainly my work.
>
> Of course, the only note on the page is C National Portrait Gallery, London
> 2011. No mention of Wikipedia on CC licence unless I've missed it.
>
> Which means, they are engaged in intellectual theft. Or have I missed
> something?
>
>
> Can I sue them? And they seem to have taken other work from Wikipedia. I
> wonder if this is quite deliberate.
>
> Scott
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>