Template:Did you know nominations/Censorship by copyright

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: promoted by Lightburst talk 01:16, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Censorship by copyright

(

)

... that copyright can be used for censorship? Source: pretty much any source, ex. https://www.techdirt.com/2013/07/26/why-yes-copyright-can-be-used-to-censor-fair-use-creep-is-also-called-free-speech/
- ALT1: ... that copyright has been used to censor reporters, activists, scholars and artists? Source: https://digitalfreedomfund.org/how-copyright-bots-are-governing-free-speech-online/2/ , https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/23/copyright-law-internet-mumsnet and https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4464300 should have enough examples to cover this
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Here I Go Again (Legends of Tomorrow)
- Comment: 2nd QPQ review: Template:Did you know nominations/History of Palestinian journalism

Created by Piotrus (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 505 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:02, 5 April 2024 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article newly created; 2 QPQ done; no issues in article; I think ALT1 is more interesting so I would go with that; looks good to go. Makeandtoss (talk) 14:05, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

@Makeandtoss and Piotrus: We have to figure out why we have a 53% Earwig score. Lightburst (talk) 17:34, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Lightburst, See edit summaries. I did reuse some properly licenced content from websites under CC-BY-SA (that are also used as relevant references). EFF mostly. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 22:22, 12 April 2024 (UTC)