Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Manannan51

This page has been removed from search engines' indexes.

Contributor copyright investigation

This CCI cleanup subpage has been opened because concerns of multiple point infringement have been substantiated and further steps are necessary to address the serious risk of copyright violation from the listed contributor. Listings are not intended to imply a presumption of bad faith on the part of any contributor, as copyright laws vary widely around the world and many contributors who violate Wikipedia's copyrights policy do so inadvertently through not understanding it or the United States' laws that govern it.

If you are here because of a note on an article's talk page explaining removal of text, please do not restore any removed text without first ensuring that the text does not duplicate, closely paraphrase or plagiarize from a previously published source. You are welcome to use sourced facts that may have been removed to create new content in your own words or to incorporate brief quotations of copyrighted material in accordance with the non-free content policy and guideline.

Instructions

All contributors with no history of copyright problems are welcome to contribute to clean up. Contributors who are the subject of a contributor copyright investigation are among contributors with a history of copyright problems and so are not welcome to directly evaluate their own or others' copyright violations in CCIs. They are welcome to assist with rewriting any problems identified.

If contributors have been shown to have a history of extensive copyright violation, it may be assumed without further evidence that all of their major contributions are copyright violations, and they may be removed indiscriminately in accordance with Wikipedia:Copyright violations. Contributors who are the subject of a contributor copyright investigation are among contributors who have been shown to have a history of extensive copyright violation and so all of the below listed contributions may be removed indiscriminately. However, to avoid collateral damage, efforts should be made when possible to verify infringement before removal.

When every section is completed, please alter the listing for this CCI at Wikipedia:CCI#Open_investigations to include the tag "completed=yes". This will alert a clerk that the listing needs to be archived.

{{CCI-open|Contributor name|Day Month Year|completed=yes}}

Text

Examine the article or the diffs linked below.
If the contributor has added creative content, either evaluate it carefully for copyright concerns or remove it.

Evaluating for copyright concerns may include checking the listed sources, spot-checking using google, google books and other search engines and looking for major differences in writing style. The background may give some indication of the kinds of copyright concerns that have been previously detected. For older text, mirrors of Wikipedia content may make determining which came first difficult. It may be helpful to look for significant changes to the text after it was entered. Searching for the earlier form of text can help eliminate later mirrors. If you cannot determine which came first, text should be removed presumptively, since there is an established history of copying with the editor in question.
If you remove text presumptively, place {{subst:CCI|name=Contributor name}} on the article's talk page.
If you specifically locate infringement and remove it (or revert to a previous clean version), place {{subst:cclean}} on the article's talk page. The url parameter may be optionally used to indicate source.
If there is insufficient creative content on the page for it to survive the removal of the text or it is impossible to extricate from subsequent improvements, replace it with {{subst:copyvio}}, linking to the investigation subpage in the url parameter. List the article as instructed at the copyright problems board, but you do not need to notify the contributor. Your note on the CCI investigation page serves that purpose.
To tag an article created by the contributor for presumptive deletion, place {{subst:copyvio|url=see talk}} on the article's face and {{subst:CCId|name=Contributor name}} on the article's talk page. List the article as instructed at the copyright problems board, but you do not need to notify the contributor.

After examining an article:

replace the diffs after the colon on the listing with indication of whether a problem was found (add {{y}}) or not (add {{n}}). If the article is blanked and may be deleted, please indicate as much after the {{y}}. The {{?}} template may be used for articles where you were unable to determine whether or not a violation occurred, but are prepared to remove the article from consideration – either because the material is no longer present in the article, or it is adequately paraphrased so as to no longer be a violation (please specify which).
Follow with your username and the time to indicate to others that the article has been evaluated and appropriately addressed. This is automatically generated by four tildes (~~~~)

If a section is complete, consider collapsing it by placing {{collapse top}} and {{collapse bottom}} beneath the section header and after the final listing.

Background

Mannanan51

Mannanan51 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Check requested by MrLinkinPark333 (talk)
Came across this user after confirming the copypaste tag at Church of St. Mary, Mother of the Church (Fishkill, New York). There was copyvio added by this user in October 2012 from Saint Marys Church website. Looking around this user's contributions, I found the following:

October 2012 copying at St. Joachim and St. John the Evangelist's Church (Beacon, New York) from St. Joachim's website. The website says the document is from 2007.
Copying from Fishkill Reformed at Fishkill, New York in October 2012. The website has a copyright notice.
Copied text from the University of Dayton at Our Lady of La Salette in October 2012. Most likely originated from the 1985 book cited in the website, which is definitely copyrighted.
Their edits in 2015 were revdeleted at New York Foundling for copyvio.
In 2019, their edits were Nostra aetate were revdeleted at Nostra aetate for copyvio as well.

If you have any questions, please let me know. Thanks! Also can't leave a notice to the user as it's redirected to a different user account. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:31, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: In April 2019, they were warned about copying within Wikipedia without attribution. Therefore, please be on the lookout for any copying without attribution. Also, this user often copies from public domain. While I do see some edits are tagged with PD Notice, please watch out for any that aren't tagged with PD Notice just in case. Thanks! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 04:12, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Manannan67

Manannan67 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Check requested by MrLinkinPark333 (talk)
Came across this user after noticing that Mannanan51's userpage redirected to this user. Based on this talkpage message, I believe they are the same user. After examining the contribution under the Mannanan51 account, I thought I should examine the user contributions under the Manannan67 name to determine whether additional copyvios occured. Here's what I noticed:
Between June 2019 to February 2020, their edits to Maria Therese von Wüllenweber, Notre-Dame de la Couture and Franz Mayer & Co. were revdeleted for copyvio concerns. For the first two, please examine the public logs located here and here.
In between these revdeletes, I see a copyvio at Roman Catholic Diocese of Allentown in August 2019 by this user from a 1989 The Morning Call article (the sentence that starts with "he turned his home").
In January 2020, copyvio from the Roman Curia was added at Pontifical Roman Athenaeum Saint Apollinare by this user. According to article 5 section 1 2 of a 2017 copyright by the Vatican, publications by the Vatican and related sections are copyrighted. This copyright law specifically includes the Roman Curia, which the 2020 edit copied from.

While I am concerned about these 5 copyvios, I am majorly concerned that both the old and new accounts have 5 copyviolations. Therefore, I think these two cases should be opened together. If it's too much, then perhaps a split would be better - the older account was from 2011-June 2019 while this new account is from June 2019 to present. If you have any questions, please let me know. Thanks! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 04:43, 7 February 2021 (UTC) MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 04:43, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Subpages:

Mannanan51

Mannanan51 (talk | contribs | deleted contribs | logs | block | block log)

Pages 1 through 20

checked

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Loser (novel) (2 edits): Y removed but large copyvio, requested revdel. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 20:24, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Karl Theodor Ferdinand Grün (1 edit): N attributed merge of content they didn't create. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 20:29, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The Oregon Desert (1 edit): N attributed merge of content they didn't create; later reverted. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 20:29, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Cleopatra (crater) (1 edit): N attributed merge of content they didn't create. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 20:29, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Parish of St. Brendan and of St. Ann (2 edits): N attributed merge of content they didn't create. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 20:29, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Mary Ward (nun) (2 edits): N Any potential copyvio is content from the 1912 Catholic Encyclopedia, which is in the public domain. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 21:34, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
John Dolan (writer) (1 edit): N Checked --Zupotachyon (talk) 08:16, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sisters of the Infant Jesus (1 edit): Y Was still present in the article when I checked it, so I've nuked the copyvio sections, which date back to 2015. Copyvio revdel template placed. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 21:28, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Charlotte Harbor (estuary) (1 edit): N Attributed merge of content they did not create. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 21:38, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Our Lady of Pellevoisin (1 edit): N Attributed merge of content they did not create. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 21:45, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Due South characters (5 edits): Y Many attributed merges of content they did not create, but one merge (from Due South) was unattributed. I've attributed it now. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 23:32, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Big Coppitt Key (1 edit): N Attributed merge of content they did not create. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 23:36, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The Lifted Brow (1 edit): Y Some content merged into the article was unattributed content the author did not create. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 23:48, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Charles W. Sexton (1 edit): N Attributed merge of content they did not create. The text of the citation is in the Public Domain as a U.S. government work. Find a Grave seems to be copying from Wikipedia without attribution, rather than the other way around. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 00:01, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Society for Art History in Switzerland (1 edit): N Attributed merge of content the CCI subject did not create. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 18:59, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Order of Saint Lazarus (statuted 1910) (9 edits): Y Improperly attributed merge from Order of Lazarus. There is some reverse copyvio of the page, such as from the Constitutional Grand Priory of Carpthia, but I don't see copyvio text itself except for interwiki copying. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 07:07, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Henry Clay (steamboat) (2 edits): N Properly attributed merge. Sarah Sails was created in 2020, so similarities can't be copyvio on Wikipedia's end. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 03:37, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Canoness (2 edits): Y lot of information copied from the 1908 Catholic Encyclopedia, which is in the public domain, but some comes from a non-PD source. I've removed copyvio material and flagged for revdel. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 05:44, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Charles Bosseron Chambers (3 edits): Y Very mild copyvio (about two sentences) and an issue with WP:COPYLINK. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 19:34, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Norman Lowther Edson (1 edit): N Attributed merge of content the editor did not write. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 20:48, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pages 21 through 40

Checked

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Katharine Drexel (3 edits): Y Copy-paste of copyrighted internet content. Copyvio tag applied and article added to WP:Copyright Problems. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 02:27, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Rhetorical operations (1 edit): N Properly attributed merge of content that the editor did not write. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 04:56, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The Barry Building (1 edit): N Properly attributed merge of content that the editor did not write. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 04:57, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Cranbrook, Kent (1 edit): N Properly attributed merge of content that the editor did not write. Some external sites are using Wikipedia content without proper attribution, but this does not pose a copyright problem for our article. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 05:03, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Frank Curto (1 edit): Y There was verbatim copying from an obituary published in an academic journal in 1971. I've rephrased the content to no longer be copyvio and I've requested revdel. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 05:16, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Forest restoration (1 edit): N Properly attributed merge of content that the editor did not write. There's an undergrad slideshare that steals verbatim from this, but this does not pose a copyright problem for our article. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 05:20, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
James O'Neill (actor, born 1847) (4 edits): Y. Listed at the copyright problems board, since a large amount of the article is verbatim copyvio from the NY Times. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 01:54, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Removed copyvio from article Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(Talk) (Contributions)} 00:31, 10 August 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Mo Ling (1 edit): Y Copyright violation by copy-pasting online sources that predate the edit. Created an entry on WP:Copyright problems. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 23:05, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nicholas J. Clayton (5 edits): Y Copyright violation by copy-pasting online and offline sources. Created an entry on WP:Copyright problems. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 02:48, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
First United Methodist Church of Chicago (1 edit): N Attributed merge of content they did not write. There is some reverse copyvio from things like Flickr and a railfan blog, but those entries appear to post-date the merge. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 04:29, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The Orchard (company) (1 edit): N Attributed merge of content they did not write. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 23:20, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sulby Abbey (1 edit): Y There was some mild copy-pasting from non-PD sources, though much of the content is copy-pasted from a PD source. Copyvio tag applied. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 23:14, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
College of Mount Saint Vincent (5 edits): Y Extensive copyvio that taints more or less every subsequent revision to the page up and through the current version. Listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2022 September 19. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 04:11, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nashua, New Hampshire (1 edit): ? There may have been mild copyvio in the edit, which I have rephrased. I don't think that this needs a revdel. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 06:28, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Perfectae Caritatis (2 edits): Y Verbatim quoting from copyrighted Vatican II document. I have reverted to before the copyvio as a remedial measure and applied a {{copyvio-revdel}} tag. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 03:35, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
French school of spirituality (2 edits): Y Verbatim copying from copyrighted files that are available online. I'm unable to gain access to some of the print sources, so I've posted this at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2022 September 18 for further review. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 18:09, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
First-person narrative (2 edits): Y Copy-paste from two websites (one of which is now archived). Possible copy-paste from a source of unclear origin that may be public domain in the United States if it was published in Iran as the citation noted. Listed on copyproblems. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 04:58, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Christianized sites (1 edit): Y Improperly attributed merge that failed to link to the source. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 22:17, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Margaret Sinclair (nun) (1 edit): Y Copyright violations added by user; article required quite a bit of remediation from other editors also adding copyvios. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 18:40, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Rögnvald Kali Kolsson (1 edit): Y Copyright violations added by user from the text of an entry in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Listed on copyproblems. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 04:11, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pages 961 through 980

James Talbot (priest) (3 edits): ( 1792)( 1371)
Beuerberg Abbey (3 edits): ( 1791)( 518)( 449)
Jean-Baptiste Henri Lacordaire (3 edits): ( 1791)( 680)( 290)
Robert of Molesme (2 edits): ( 1790)( 469)
Milton, Ulster County, New York (7 edits): ( 1787)( 1531)( 1151)( 781)( 749)( 433)( 285)
Michele Carcano (1 edit): ( 1784)
Ann Blyth (1 edit): ( 1781)
Suppression of Religious Houses Act 1535 (2 edits): ( 1780)( 196)
Constantine of Murom (3 edits): ( 1780)( 267)
Marc Pourpe (2 edits): ( 1778)( 625)
New Eve (1 edit): ( 1777)
Pope Gregory VI (3 edits): ( 1777)( 559)
Clinical clerkship (1 edit): ( 1777)
Annibale Maria di Francia (2 edits): ( 1776)( 305)
Creator Omnium (4 edits): ( 1775)( 1192)( 749)( 238)
St. Mary's Seminary and University (1 edit): N The contributions by Manannan don't contain copyright violations, but rather incorporate material from the 1910 Catholic Encyclopedia with an appropriate PD label. There's some websites that have engaged in backwardscopy of prior versions of the page, but no copyright violations on this Wikipedia page appear to be present upon a thorough check. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 16:53, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Cahul (1 edit): N Properly attributed merge where the merged content does not appear to be copyvio. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 17:15, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wappingers Falls Historic District (5 edits): ( 1771)( 1386)( 1337)( 390)( 266)
Saint Anne (3 edits): ( 1769)( 559)( 475)
Sisters of Saint Elizabeth (1 edit): Y Copyvio from <http://www.elzbietietes.lt/index.php?id=14>. There is incorporation of public domain works into the article that appears to have been done properly. The parts of the article that violated copyright have been re-written. Revision deletion is requested. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 17:11, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pages 981 through 1000

Frances Bedingfeld (3 edits): ( 1768)( 614)( 153)
Dymphna (2 edits): ( 1767)( 388)
The Jesuit Relations (3 edits): ( 1766)( 602)( 404)
Rosalie Rendu (1 edit): ( 1763)
Three Secrets of Fátima (7 edits): ( 1762)( 1069)( 957)( 688)( 648)( 413)( 291)
Inter caetera (4 edits): ( 1762)( 1034)( 791)( 374)
Void marriage (1 edit): ( 1760)
Saint Andrew's Day (3 edits): ( 1760)( 393)( 237)
John Henry Rogers (2 edits): ( 1759)( 431)
Rath Melsigi (3 edits): ( 1758)( 1313)
Wonderland Trail Shelters (10 edits): ( 1756)( 1501)( 1431)( 1186)( 586)( 358)( 356)( 287)( 215)( 187)
Premonstratensians (2 edits): ( 1755)( 216)
Wuthering Heights (1 edit): ( 1754)
Battle of Glen Trool (2 edits): ( 1752)( 563)
Ruadhán of Lorrha (1 edit): ( 1752)
Concordat of 1801 (1 edit): ( 1751) ? Possible copyvio of <https://www.jbjv.com/Commentaire-du-Concordat-de-1801.html> that has been translated via an older version of Google Translate. A Wikipedian with advanced proficiency in French is requested; there are some phrases that look plausibly like copyvio, but my French is not good enough to 100% be sure. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 17:39, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Gabriel (4 edits): ( 1751)( 575)( 369)( 306)
Noël Chabanel (2 edits): ( 1750)( 219)
Contumeliosus of Riez (2 edits): N Original content that appears to not be a copyvio. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 05:32, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Charbel Makhlouf (1 edit): Y Copy-paste from online Catholic websites that were copyrighted. Copyvio-revdel tag applied. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 01:32, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This report generated by ContributionSurveyor.java at 2021-02-15T20:46:21.443903Z. Survey URL: http://wikipediatools.appspot.com/contributionsurveyor.jsp?mode=on&user=Mannanan51&wiki=en.wikipedia.org&noreverts=1&nodrafts=1&earliest=&latest=&bytefloor=150

Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Manannan51

Instructions

Text

Background

Mannanan51

Manannan67

Mannanan51

Pages 1 through 20

Pages 21 through 40

Pages 41 through 60

Pages 61 through 80

Pages 81 through 100

Pages 101 through 120

Pages 121 through 140

Pages 141 through 160

Pages 161 through 180

Pages 181 through 200

Pages 201 through 220

Pages 221 through 240

Pages 241 through 260

Pages 261 through 280

Pages 281 through 300

Pages 301 through 320

Pages 321 through 340

Pages 341 through 360

Pages 361 through 380

Pages 381 through 400

Pages 401 through 420

Pages 421 through 440

Pages 441 through 460

Pages 461 through 480

Pages 481 through 500

Pages 501 through 520

Pages 521 through 540

Pages 541 through 560

Pages 561 through 580

Pages 581 through 600

Pages 601 through 620

Pages 621 through 640

Pages 641 through 660

Pages 661 through 680

Pages 681 through 700

Pages 701 through 720

Pages 721 through 740

Pages 741 through 760

Pages 761 through 780

Pages 781 through 800

Pages 801 through 820

Pages 821 through 840

Pages 841 through 860

Pages 861 through 880

Pages 881 through 900

Pages 901 through 920

Pages 921 through 940

Pages 941 through 960

Pages 961 through 980

Pages 981 through 1000