Talk:The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People/Archives/2016

content removal

I've removed a lot of stuff from this article. It seemed over promotional and almost like a guide. Spacecowboy420 (talk) 13:20, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

I would have liked to see the 7 habits listed. --Lbeaumont (talk) 20:34, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

7 Habits [re-]RESTORED!! Again, trying to "save the INTEGRAL baby" (NOT "promo crap")! Although WP:NOTADVICE&WP:NOTMANUAL, even "highly ranked" OUTSIDE articles like Forbes.com RELY on WP's list! [1] [2] --Curious1i (talk) 17:00, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Can WP's "own" material/edits BECOME "copyrighted" and FORCIBLY removed from WP articles??

I recently (2016-March-25; above content removal) copied (in order to "restore" it) the following FROM https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_7_Habits_of_Highly_Effective_People&oldid=704974271

(Redacted)

Soon after, it was "permanently" removed (blocked) for Copyright infringement.

It SEEMS that this info (or similar) has been a part of THIS article for most of it's existence, so much so that OUTSIDE article(s) seem to rely on it:

   "I went to Wikipedia to look up the 7 habits..." (http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericjackson/2012/07/24/the-only-thing-you-need-to-remember-about-the-seven-habits-of-highly-effective-people)

I do not wish to further antagonize(?) User:Diannaa (who seems to be a "Copyright Expert")...

THANKS for any help/pointers/links in helping with my [mis-]understanding(s)....

--Curious1i (talk) 00:51, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

• Given that the content was removed per copyright, I have redacted it from here. -- The Voidwalker ^Discuss 01:11, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
• It's copyright material, and we can't add it here, not in the article and not on the talk page. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 01:13, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
  • So basically this article has been copied from many, many times and there are a bazillion hits on Google that implies it's been copied. However, a clear history and evolution of the article (and it's copies) can be demonstrated. Diannaa has restored the content. I've also added a reverse copyright violation template to this talk page. The relevant proof:
    • Here is where the "paradigm shift" phrase is first introduced, containing "it makes the reader to": [[3]]
    • This is the only hit I can find that uses the original phrasing: [[4]], which was established in July 2012, so it's possible it copied from Wikipedia - the other book descriptions on that page have google hits, so they look copied too.
    • Then there is the part where the phrase is changed to "it helps the reader": [[5]]. After that, many many hits show up. This strongly implies that Wikipedia was repeatedly copied by external sites.
    • The final change in phrase is the addition of "i.e.": [[6]]. Again many hits show up.
  • In conclusion, it looks to me like there is a gradual change in phrasing, documented on the page history, and repeated backwards copying from Wikipedia to many external sites. GoodStuff (talk) 13:53, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • It's not so much the "paradigm shift" paragraph I was concerned about but the summary that follows of the seven habits. Looking back, although it has been edited heavily since then, we have had a version of that summary since 2003. It looks like the material has been removed and re-added a couple of times, which is what triggered the bot report. Looks like you are right, it was a false positive. Sorry about the mistake. — Diannaa (talk) 20:30, 12 August 2016 (UTC)