Stock car racing:Copyright violations

Images and other media are viewed in a slightly different way, because there are many types of licenses applied to them that are accepted here. But in short: media files are not published under suitable free licenses and do not meet Creative Commons Attribution – Share Alike Version 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA), may be deemed not to be accepted. See details on this Stock car racing:Image usage policy and Stock car racing:Free content, and Image deletion guide for a number of steps. The problem is reserved for images or other files.

Also links should not be created material that infringes copyright.

Remedy for copyright infringement
The measures taken when there is a suspected violation of copyright policy will depend on the nature of the particular case. If you suspect a copyright infringement but are not sure if the content is protected, or if the external site has been previously copied back from, at least you should mention that problem at talk page of the article, if there are already discussions already in it. Unless what you suspect has been satisfactorily resolved shortly thereafter, do not mark the article with the syntax. Others can then check the situation and take appropriate action if needed. The most useful information you can provide is the address or sources you believe are the source text that someone else has copied. You can also raise your doubts in Copyright issues.

Some cases may just be a false alert. For example, the text found on any website that actually is the site that copied content from before would not be copyright infringement - at least not with Content from Wikipedia. In this situation, it would be a good idea to leave a note at the talk page of the article to limit such false warnings in the future. Another situation: if the contributor is actually the author of that text, even if the text was previously published somewhere else under different terms, then they have the right to post that text up here under CC BY-SA and GFDL are not considered copyright infringement, as long as they provide appropriate worldwide release under either 's license or a free license compatible with the two. license it. (However, that text may still be inappropriate for Wikipedia for another reason.) A copyright holder cannot both retain non-free copyright for their content elsewhere, and license it. for a use of that content here, because 's licensing mechanism requires that the site's readers and end users are given the right to reuse the content, through a free copyright notice that clearly states at the bottom of every page of. The procedure for donating copyrighted material is not free by releasing it described in Donating copyrighted documents. Until the donation process is complete, the entire article content should be replaced with. Similarly, if they can verify a compatible license through a notice at an external website or can prove that the content has been released to the public domain, it will not be considered a copyright violation. permission. A note explaining the situation should be written in the talk page (including, if previously published, the URL of the publisher; any permission to transmit via email must be verified through manual means). at All rights reserved) and provide proper attribution within the article page. See instructions on attribution for Freely Licensed Source or Go public domain.

If you have good reasons to suspect that content violates copyright policy and some, but not all, the content of the article is most likely a copyright violation, then the content The content of the infringing content should be removed, and a note about that must be written on the talk page with the source of the offending content, if you have identified it. The syntax  will help you easily create such notes. If the copyright holder's permission can then be verified in an appropriate manner, that portion of the text may be recovered. If the entire content of the article is most likely to be copyright infringement or the removal of the infringing text is not an optimal solution because it will affect the readability of the article, Check out the history of the post; If the article does not exist in an older version, you should revise the article content back to that version.

If there is no such old version, you can edit the article from scratch, and if you are not able to do so, the article will most likely be deleted. Currently at, administrators can remove posts that clearly infringe copyright after they are tagged for removal immediately for such reason; see page removal policy related to content with copyright infringement. Collaborators can insert the

Measures with the posted content violates copyright
If you identify who has posted content violates copyright, please inform them to know about terms of Use and the policy on copyright of. When an article is tagged it is recommended to delete due to copyright infringement or suspected copyright violation, you can notify people who write articles know by adding the syntax  on the discussion page, their individual.

If people who write articles or contribute content violating copyright was clearly prompted about his behavior that continues to re-offend, they should be reported again in page message for sysop.

Contributors how many times posted up documents in violation of copyright despite the have been warned, reminded in an appropriate manner may be an admin, and any ban not to edit anymore to prevent problems arising later. The contribution of serious violations privacy policy about copyright by uploading multiple files have the copyright or add text are copyright in many of the articles can be banned without prior warning to protect the benefits of the project, as a list, satisfactory to ensure that the violation will not recur. In severe cases, administrators can put in place the conditions before the removal of prohibition violators, such as the need for their collaboration in the editing of the content by revealing the exact sources that they have used. If the contribution has been determined that there is a revision history copyright violation too many times, administrators assume that all contributions of they could very well infringe the copyright, and all content they add to Wikipedia will be removed without need to test more.

Members are given tools delete a page (including administrators and coordinator) caution in the re-evaluation of the content of the article or file to minimize errors that may arise. Although the article is clearly identified as copyright violations need to be quick, the wait for a short period of time from 5 to 30 minutes before performing the delete operation also aims on is always recommended.

Information for the copyright owner
If you are owner of the copyright or represent the owner of copyright, and you believe that is infringing to the copyright of you, we can support you by e-mail. You can contact through the address   to send the request in a formal way; please give it the exact URL (the "address website" page of posts displayed in your web browsers, starting with cluster [//stockcarracing.miraheze.org https://stockcarracing.miraheze.org ...]) and provide adequate information that can prove you are the owner of the copyright. Please be patient because maybe your letter will not be able to respond quickly, by only a small group of volunteers in charge of this work.

If you prefer to use to process the request for official to submit an appeal takedown under the DMCA, you should contact the designated authorities of Miraheze.

If you are the copyright owner and want to license your content to them can re-use, please refer to page Stock car racing:Donating the copyrighted material.

Tools and templates

 * Duplication Detector – a tool used to compare the two any site to determine whether text has been copied from where to where. Can use it to check the content in a article (you can use current version or older versions) can match a article in a website identified or not. It also supports comparison of text documents to,  and can probe the cache of Google.
 * Copyvio Detector – a tool used to test has the same content as in the article at the other site or not by the search engine Turnitin or the link have in the article. It can also compare the content of two website as Duplication Detector, but less features, more options.
 * Be used as the source: template used in your discussion to acknowledge content articles have been a source external use
 * vpbq: marked cards, a page of copyright violations will be deleted immediately
 * Copy paste: add a notification on the page when the "suspect" has content that violates copyright
 * external links copyright violation: add a notification on the page may be external links to the infringing material copyright
 * lkvpbq: insert a card in the row next to the annotations can be links to the infringing material copyright
 * cvpbq: insert a card in the end of the sentences may have copyright infringement
 * btvpbq: template used in the discussion page to provide notes on the content section a copyright violation has been removed
 * Uw-copyright: message alert collaborators that the content violates copyright, which they added to the article was removed (not deleted posts)
 * messages about copyright violation: message note with collaborators that the article they created has been identified as a copyright violation and may soon be deleted immediately
 * Dual: template used directly in the article page to the explanatory note about the integration of the text was the other released under the CC BY-SA and GFDL
 * "evidence must necessarily be provided in your discussion the following article process authentication using the template OTRS, except themselves source specified is to use such a license"


 * Cc-by-sa-3.0: template used directly in the article page to the explanatory note about the integration of the text have been others released only under the CC BY-SA 3.0
 * "evidence must necessarily be provided in your discussion the following article process authentication using the template OTRS stock, except themselves source specified is to use such a license"


 * Source PVCC: template used directly in the article page to the explanatory note about the integration of the text have been others released to the public domain
 * "evidence must necessarily be provided in your discussion the following article process authentication using the template OTRS stock, except themselves source specified is to use such a license"