This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media franchises, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to media franchises 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.Media franchisesWikipedia:WikiProject Media franchisesTemplate:WikiProject Media franchisesmedia franchise articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disney, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of The Walt Disney Company and its affiliated companies 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.DisneyWikipedia:WikiProject DisneyTemplate:WikiProject DisneyDisney articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction 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.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature 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.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles
I'm not sure, but maybe the article could include something like this? Only one film was released theatrically so a box office table doesn't make sense. Maybe write it out as text and not use a table at all? -- 109.77.203.103 (talk) 18:35, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Scorpions13256: This morning some significant changes were reverted as a potential copyright violation. However, in looking over the duplication report provided, there doesn't seem to be a single match between the newly added content and the supposed source. Seems this was overly hasty. More to the point, I've never seen this blog before and everything in the "Settings" section was written by myself this morning from memory, with occasional fact-checking from other WP pages. The "Novel" section was copy/pasted from the main article, which is fairly customary, but any copyright violations with that section are the result of the parent article and should be address there without removing unoffending material. Am I missing something in this report? 2600:8800:23A5:5D00:C52B:7999:6CF8:FC95 (talk) 18:53, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am looking at the old revision and I do see some content that looks like an exact copy from that website. I'll ping Diannaa though. It could just be a mirror site. I do not remember Blogspot being this way. I am sorry for the trouble. Scorpions13256 (talk) 19:01, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think I'm seeing the same thing now with like a 75% match, but that's all from the material taken from the main novel page. Seems like that article may have some duplication issues (or perhaps chicken and egg?), I just copied it to help expand this article. The only content I'm married to saving is the "Setting" which I wrote myself, and aside from some phrases like "alien species known as", doesn't seem flagged. 2600:8800:23A5:5D00:C52B:7999:6CF8:FC95 (talk) 19:07, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Are you saying you copied from within Wikipedia? That requires attribution. I am not sure how to do that, so I'll leave it to Diaannaa if she does not mind. Again, sorry for being too hasty. I am not all that experienced with CopyPatrol just yet. That is how I came across your edits. Scorpions13256 (talk) 19:12, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, the 'novel' section was copy/pasted in verbatim chunks from the main Starship Troopers article. So you did the right thing if there is an issue with that material, I just assumed it was already vetted and copied it over. I'm not sure who copied whom, in that case, but I would like to salvage the "Setting" material I wrote if there's no issues with that. Thank you.2600:8800:23A5:5D00:C52B:7999:6CF8:FC95 (talk) 19:35, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Go right ahead with the section you wrote. If the other Wikipedia page was a reverse copyvio, you can add it back with attribution, but I would wait and see if Diannaa responds. Scorpions13256 (talk) 20:39, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict × 2) There's a couple clues that the blog is a Wikipedia mirror: (1) The particular shade of blue and the identical formatting; (2) it says at the bottom: "Source of the article: Wikipedia". How to add attribution when copying within Wikipedia: via edit summary in the edit where you add the copied content (you can make a dummy edit and add attribution in a later edit summary if you forget). Here is a sample edit summary. For more info, please see WP:Copying within Wikipedia.— Diannaa (talk) 20:42, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I didn't realize it was that simple. I have dealt with reverse copyvios before, but this was unusual. Sorry about any disruption. Scorpions13256 (talk) 20:45, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
