This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the John T. Richardson article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles
This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because the copyvios report shows that less than 50% of material is likely copyright violation. I believe editing is the course of action here and not deletion. --Paul McDonald (talk) 02:53, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Paulmcdonald You said, "phrases are strings of common words like names of organizations, degrees, etc" and no it isn't. Here is a long list of what I know can be reworded from the multiple souces - "Richardson was born in Dallas, Texas to Patrick", "ordained to the priesthood in 1949", "Cornerstone Campaign from the late 1980s to the early 1990s", "led to major expansions", "loop and Lincoln Park campuses", "the largest Catholic university in the", "a $2.5 million scholarship program ", " residence halls in Lincoln Park, to attract students from out of state. By the end of Richardson's presidency, enrollment had reached 16,500", "English composition and anthropology to sociology and comparative religion", "contributions and inducted him as a Laureate in the Order of Lincoln", "also helped introduce the International Human Rights Law Institute, the Institute for Business Ethics and the Center for Urban Education", "residence halls in Lincoln Park", and more if you look through Earwig. I have no idea how you came to that conclusion in your edit summary. How the heck did this pass ITN? There is also Magnificent Mile shooting and Bally's Chicago, the latter of which is at DYK. Pinging Nikkimaria to see if they know what the best course of action is. SL93 (talk) 03:18, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just noting that I've seen this but there seems to have been good discussion and action already - let me know if you still need me to take a look. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:19, 25 May 2022 (UTC)::[reply]
Nikkimaria Thanks for looking. I also started a CCI per Diannaa's recommendation. SL93 (talk) 02:21, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also pinging BlueMoonset since this also involves DYK. I just picked another article at random by the editor which is Lisa Cano Burkhead - the first thing caught by Earwig copied the article, but it's still more of the same. SL93 (talk) 03:42, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Paulmcdonald:, @SL93:: Sorry for the late response. I want to make this 100% clear, my intention was not for any of my article creations to come off as copyrighted, and I you see my edits on this wiki know that I do my best to be a good contributor. I thought that having information that corroborated with the reference cited was a good thing (at least that was what I've been doing). I tried my best at rephrasing and adding original material but in many cases the information was pretty straight forward. Tomorrow I'll do my best to fix up this article, the Magnificent Mile shooting and Bally's Chicago's articles. Sorry for any trouble presented by these articles. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 04:00, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SL93:, I've fixed up Bally's Chicago if you could take a look to see if that's all good. I'll be fixing up Richardson right now. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 04:06, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure if you realize how big of a deal this is when every article that I pick at random from your created contributions have the same issue such as Violeta Bermúdez. SL93 (talk) 04:10, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SL93:, Like I said, I sincerely thought that I was doing nothing wrong since I felt adding information that was corroborated with sources was nothing bad. I'm used to adding sources to uncited information on articles for ITN that I thought it'd be the same the other way around. I fixed Richardson's article per your suggestions, how does it look? TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 04:15, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If I looked at that again, I would feel that I have to go through all of your created articles and that is a huge headache. It's nothing bad...if you don't copy and paste. SL93 (talk) 04:17, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SL93:, That's the thing though, I didn't copy and paste in all honesty. I did add some words to obviously not have the article appear as a copy of a news clipping. I felt that some words were pretty clear and cut. However, per your Richardson suggestions I know see where I screwed up and now understand. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 04:21, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I would really like to believe all of what you say and I hate to assume bad faith, but I need to be honest with you. A part of me finds it doubtful due to Bernadette Peters on stage, screen and record being a 92% copyright violation from one source and you previously copied content from the Simple English Wikipedia. I am also ashamed of ITN for passing the John T. Richardson article through. SL93 (talk) 04:25, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for pinging me. I just was doing a little cleanup with my "mop and bucket" -- I have no opinion on the other articles. I think we're good on the copyvio myself, others are free to disagree. If we aren't good, I would still point toward editing rather than deletion.--Paul McDonald (talk) 04:30, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Paulmcdonald I'm not looking at this article and others by this editor for copyright violations for now because I know it would make my head hurt even more. I really wish it was just this article. The 92% match for another article that says "violation suspected" did make my heard hurt a bit. SL93 (talk) 04:36, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SL93:, In defense of the Bernadette Peters on stage, screen and record creation that was copied from Bernadette Peters page and I assumed it wasn't copyrighted because it came from her wiki article and that in itself wasn't tagged for anything. Also keep in mind, this was the first time when a user reached out to me and explained that when creating a filmography article I had to attribute it to the main article which I started doing since then. Before that no one reached out to me so I assumed what I was doing was fine. All of my article creations are in good faith and it is only now that I'm starting to realize what I've been doing wrong. If everything I was doing was in bad faith, I wouldn't be putting in the effort in fixing up my mistakes. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 04:33, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
TDKR Chicago 101 Then it's a double copyright violation because the original content came from here. I suggest finding a mentor and that you should go through all of your contributions. SL93 (talk) 04:36, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I now see that the article I pointed to copied from Wikipedia, but you are right that copying within Wikipedia needs to be attributed. I just wish you would have fixed it when the other editor pointed it out. SL93 (talk) 04:39, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SL93: When the editor pointed it out, it was specifically in regards to splitting filmographies from a main article to a separate article because that was the only time I was reached out about that in this manner. Any edits regarding filmographies I did began attributing which then leads to my defense of saying all of my edits are done in good faith.
Also going further, when I split Peters's filmography for a separate article, I assumed since there were no tags or anything everything was good, that's why when you pointed out it being a double copyright violation I was surprised because before splitting there were no issues noted in the main article. But once again I'd like to emphasizes, I meant no harm in my article creations and assumed what I was doing was okay. Had someone reached out to me beforehand you would 100% notice a change in my article creations. If what I did was in bad faith, I would not be frantically trying to undo my wrongs right now. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 04:47, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I believe you which is why I suggested finding a mentor. Honestly, I'm more annoyed that ITN passed this article. Your article Charles H. Townes which passed ITN in 2015 is even worse. SL93 (talk) 04:52, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SL93: As long as you think I'm not some bad editor or vandal then that's good. I'll shy away from article creations and just focus on fixing up articles or providing updates. I've fixed up the articles so hopefully my f**k ups have been reduced. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 04:58, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If there were significant copyvios in any of these articles, there may need to be revdels to hide the material. Pinging Diannaa in the hopes that she can check the articles mentioned above, not just this one, and do whatever needs to be done. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:30, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To be safe, we could do a blast and re-start. I don't think that would do any harm.--Paul McDonald (talk) 18:37, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Responding to ping. If there's five or more instances found of violations, please consider filing for a case to be opened at WP:CCI. I will clean this particular article. — Diannaa (talk) 19:44, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}