User talk:Jmcgnh/Archives/2020/08

Copyvio

Hi, regarding your advice at User talk:Santoshram1; copyvio of 37% is certainly a problem and a valid reason for declining a draft. If you disagree I suggest you speak to @Diannaa: who is an admin expert on copyvio, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 19:42, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

@Atlantic306: I see that Diannaa has done the necessary recision, but when 90% of the copied text (with the revdel I can't get an exact word count) is a list of film festivals and awards - facts that arguably can't really be copyrighted - and other remedies are available (such as Ram releasing the content of his website under a compatible license) - it didn't strike me as the best choice for declining the draft. But reviewers are allowed to choose their reviewing style and you may believe my expanded response to Ram was too bitey. I'll leave my response here and won't respond there. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:51, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Anba Angaelos

I don't think that the material from 2007 merits revdel. It's not a direct cut and paste as it adds information e.g. dates that aren't in the source (and the spelling is appalling). Delting over a hundred revisions for a fairly minor matter when the serious copyvios from 2016 have already been dealt with seems a bit too much to me. Nthep (talk) 18:02, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Nthep, No argument from me. I just went to the earliest diff that seemed to be directly copied. As I noted, it started off with a small bit copied, then grew much, much larger. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:21, 25 August 2020 (UTC)