Band Bio copied from Wikipedia?

It's perfectly legal to take information from Wikipedia while crediting the source. Here is what says on Wikipedia about the licensing of their content:

"All text in Wikipedia was covered by GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL), a copyleft license permitting the redistribution, creation of derivative works, and commercial use of content while authors retain copyright of their work,^[130] up until June 2009, when the site switched to Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (CC-by-SA) 3.0.^[131]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#License_and_language_editions

Creative Commons are different than copyright. This is what that particular kind of license means:

Under the following conditions:

• Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).

  Attribute this work:
  < id="work-attribution" value="" readonly="readonly" ="." =".'work-attribution'.;" ="text"> < id="license-code" value="CC BY-SA 3.0" =""> < id="license-" value="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/" ="">

  What does "Attribute this work" mean?

  The page you came from contained embedded licensing metadata, including how the creator wishes to be attributed for re-use. You can use the HTML here to cite the work. Doing so will also include metadata on your page so that others can find the original work as well.

• Share Alike — If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same, similar or a compatible license.

This is also important:

Notice — For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. The best way to do this is with a link to this web page.

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

Logan wrote: Yeah, well Neal Morse's bio was lifted from his website so one can't expect objectivity. Back when this site was first being built, I believe that the common practice was to lift from other sources without proper accreditation (or any in many cases).

This just gets worse and worse. Am I the only one who hates plagiarizing? There is no excuse for any of this.

The funny thing is that it's from 2004, so it's not even up to date promotional material on an objective resource!

NotAProghead wrote: Henry Plainview wrote: This just gets worse and worse. Am I the only one who hates plagiarizing? There is no excuse for any of this. Would you like to offer something more constructive? For example re-write some plagiarized bios.

For real, anyone can help fix our bios. If you see a plagirized bio that needs to be replaced, please write an original bio and send it to me and said plagarized bio will be replaced, pronto.

Shadow Gallery biography:




Shadow Gallery is a progressive metal band, which formed in Pennsylvania (USA) in the 1980's, originally under the name "Sorcerer". After changing their name to Shadow Gallery, the band recorded an 8-track demo, which helped them sign to Magna Carta Records in 1991. The band released their first proper EP of tracks a year later, with copies being sold in Europe and Japan aswell.

In late 1993, the band recruited a new musician to their course - Keyboardist and guitarist Gary Wehrkamp, and in 1994, added another virtuoso to their palette, drummer Kevin Soffera.
In 1995, the band released their second proper studio recording: CARVED IN STONE.
Shortly after, Shadow Gallery released another full length recording, titled TYRANNY (1998). This is a concept album, concerning itself deeply with politics. This album also features a guest appearance from vocalist James LaBrie (DREAM THEATER).

To follow up their latest hit, the band released LEGACY in 2001. Many fans consider this to be a marked change, displaying a more progressive, technical and focussed Shadow Gallery. This was the band's last recording under Magna Carta Records. This album also features many tracks with a more commercial taste, and although released between to concept records, stands as a collection of songs.

In 2005, the band returned with ROOM V, another concept record made to pick up where Tyranny's narrative left off. Many consider this album to be the band's ultimate success, only challenged by their 2009 release, DIGITAL GHOSTS. ROOM V also featured more guest work, mainly in the form of Arjen Lucassen (AYREON) on vocals for sections, and also contributing a guitar solo.

The band followed up their dark concept record with 2009's DIGITAL GHOSTS, another smash hit amongst metal fans. Many consider this to be their best album, and this also features a new member, vocalist Brian Ashland. This album blends symphonic rock, metal and progressive technical metal seemlessly.

Shadow Gallery can easily be enjoyed by any (prog) metal fan, and is one of the best prog acts of the decade.


Current Lineup:

Gary Wehrkamp - Piano, guitars, keyboards, vocals
Brendt Allman - Guitar, acoustic guitar, vocals
Carl Cadden-James - Bass, vocals, flute, fretless bass
Chris Ingles - Piano, keyboards
Joe Nevolo - Drums
Brian Ashland - Vocals

Former members:
Mike Baker - Vocals
Kevin Soffera - Drums


DISCOGRAPHY:
-SHADOW GALLERY - 1992
-CARVED IN STONE - 1995
-TYRANNY - 1998
-LEGACY - 2001
-ROOM V - 2005
-DIGITAL GHOSTS - 2009

Shadow Gallery official website - http://www.shadowgallery.com/

(Biography by Joel G, Australia)





Hope thats good enough - Couple of details missing, but I was working solely from the band's homepage biography.

Not particularly

Thanks for adding it Easy Money



Problem resolved everyone?

You can't rush art

Do we have an easy way to find other bios which have been plagiarised?

NotAProghead wrote: Henry Plainview wrote: This just gets worse and worse. Am I the only one who hates plagiarizing? There is no excuse for any of this. Would you like to offer something more constructive? For example re-write some plagiarized bios.

I don't know a damn thing about Neal Morse, why would I do that?

Henry Plainview wrote: Logan wrote: Yeah, well Neal Morse's bio was lifted from his website so one can't expect objectivity. Back when this site was first being built, I believe that the common practice was to lift from other sources without proper accreditation (or any in many cases).  This just gets worse and worse. Am I the only one who hates plagiarizing? There is no excuse for any of this.