Template:Did you know nominations/Allegiance bias
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: rejected by Yoninah (talk) 22:10, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Ineligible due to extensive copying of -NC and -ND materials
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Allegiance bias
[edit]- ... that due to an allegiance bias, forensic evaluators who strongly oppose the death-penalty are significantly less likely to accept a Competency for Execution (CFE) referral?
Source: An Investigation of Psychologists' Practices and Attitudes toward Participation in Capital Evaluations
Disclosure: Content for this article has been taken from PubMed Central from within their Open Access Subset defeating all/any copyright infringement violations.
Created by Topcipher (talk). Self-nominated at 21:45, 31 March 2017 (UTC).
This article is new enough and long enough. The hook facts are cited inline and the article is neutral. There appear to be chunks of text copied from this source. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:38, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
- @Cwmhiraeth: Thank you for helping with your review. Yes, the content for this article has been adopted from the aforementioned (and many others, alike) link as they are under PubMed Central's Open Access subset i.e. so long as the content has been supported with appropriate credits and are not being used for commercial purposes, we are free to Share (i.e. copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format) and Adapt (i.e. remix, transform, and build upon the material).
The same has been provided within the article's (said PubMed's link) Copyright and License information as well and also, I have the {{Free-content attribution}} provided with the Wiki article as well.
Hope this clarifies. Thanks, again. TopCipher (talk) 10:48, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
- @Cwmhiraeth: Thank you for helping with your review. Yes, the content for this article has been adopted from the aforementioned (and many others, alike) link as they are under PubMed Central's Open Access subset i.e. so long as the content has been supported with appropriate credits and are not being used for commercial purposes, we are free to Share (i.e. copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format) and Adapt (i.e. remix, transform, and build upon the material).
Thank you, I didn't notice the small print disclaimer on the nomination template. I am happy with the explanation and the fact that this is not a copyright infringement. The hook facts are cited inline to reliable sources and this is ready to go. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:02, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
- Just because material is licensed for copying and redistribution does not mean that it can be copied verbatim into a Wikipedia article, even with attribution. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources. --Macrakis (talk) 19:34, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
I will be requesting that Nikkimaria take a look to see whether the copied material precludes this from meeting DYK length requirements and whether there are any other issues of concern in the area of copying and close paraphrasing. Until this is done, the article should not be promoted. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:43, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
- The copying is not a copyright infringement, but it also precludes DYK - not simply because of the length issue, but because our policies prevent using -NC or -ND materials as free. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:12, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
If it precludes DYK, then it can't pass. Marking for closure. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:03, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
