Is anyone doing anything about these requests? RJFJR 16:30, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
Could we rename this page to avoid requests for content that has already been uploaded/placed in Wikipedia. --Easyas12c 20:24, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
The section "Using this page", specifically the template itself referenced in sub-section "Requesting examination", and the entire sub-section "Answering", are ungrammatical and nearly incomprehensible. (For example, When you are sure it is legal to include the examined target in Wikipedia. Do so yourself. It's the best way of showing you're sure about it., and When you think it is illegal to include the content. Use the talk page at the target article to dicus the case with others, until someone knows for sure, and is thus able to fulfill the request.) Several sentences have no verbs, etc.
Normally I'd just rewrite it instead of complaining about it, but really, I'm having trouble trying to understand it. My guess is that the author meant something along the lines of "If you're confident that the requested material is free of copyright issues, insert it in the article yourself, as a good-faith confirmation of your belief; if not, discuss the matter on the article's talk page instead."
I plan to reword "Using This Page" and the template to reflect better grammar and usage and make it easier to understand. MCB 06:46, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
The first sentence states: This page is a forum for requesting co-examination of copyright and licensing of content with other Wikipedians before it is included in a Wikipedia article.
I had a question as to whether an image was copyrighted, as I intended to use it in an article. I did not post the image to the article due to the fact that there is currently a question about copyright. I did, however, upload the image. My thought was that the image, being freshly uploaded, would not be linked to any articles until the question as to its copyright was resolved, at which point I would include it in the article.
In response to my request for copyright examination, Easyas12c said, in part: Because the image is already posted to Wikipedia the case should be handled at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. Copyright examination is for material not yet posted to Wikipedia. Further, Easyas12c continued, Also, if you have any suggestions how we can avoid other people doing the same mistake in future, please tell us at Wikipedia talk:Requested copyright examinations. This is a very common error and we are looking for solution.
I interpreted this to mean that merely uploading the image to Wikipedia, even if not linked to an article, before copyright issues were resolved was an error. To clarify this, I suggest revising as follows: This page is a forum for requesting co-examination of copyright and licensing of content with other Wikipedians before it is included in a Wikipedia article, or to request such co-examination of copyright and licensing of an image before the image is uploaded to Wikipedia.
I will move the request to Wikipedia:Copyright problems as instructed.
Tckma 19:24, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
We need a policy for closing answered/unanswered. Should we also have a policy for dealing with the stuff, that got to the page by accident? Other than just moving them to the bottom of the page. In future it might be a good idea to rapidly remove them from page and inform the poster. What do you think? --Easyas12c 19:45, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
Just one of the many problems with Wikipedia. Wish such problems were handled in a more rapid fashion. --293.xx.xxx.xx 11:56, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm creating a template that can be posted to talk pages of wikipedians who post requests which belong elsewhere.
See ((copyrightexaminationrejected)).
I see that there are requests here which are more than a year old. Why have they been ignored? -- Mikeblas 01:38, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
How does this page differ from Wikipedia talk:Copyrights/Can I use... Seems like that page is actually active whereas this one never seems to get looked at. Ydam 04:35, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
No one article. I have tried this in various places, with no reply anywhere yet. It seems to me that Wikimapia, full as it is of Google Earth images, but be a copyright violation. (Yes, I've asked on Talk:Wikimapia, but I couldn't say there was a definitive reply.) The reason this is relevant is that there are thousands of pages linking to wikimapia.org, all of which are against the guidelines in WP:EL if the site is a copyvio. I removed one link before realising the scale of the problem. My own license for Google Earth gives me rights only in "home, personal or recreational use", and I think Wikimapia can't really be described as any of those. Anyway, I think this is an important point. If it was already discussed, a pointer on Talk:Wikimapia may save wasted energy in the future. Notinasnaid 21:37, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
I may try to revive this page. Would anybody object if I delete all requests older than 9 months without review? This should cut the list in half. I can then proceed to review the older requests and see if they are still applicable.↔NMajdan•talk 18:55, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
In case of inclusion, copyright examinations do not end until the content is really physically included into the article. Study carefully the instructions under Closing a valid request in the project description. --Easyas12c 01:59, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
I just posted a request for a copyright examination, and it was summarily removed, apparently because I didn't follow the instructions! I don't even know where to begin with this, it is so mindboggling stupid. I shall say no more now, because I'm too frustrated to be constructive. You guys figure it out. Hesperian 01:54, 19 May 2007 (UTC)