Having the editor automatically check whether text being added already appears elsewhere on the internet (i.e. like Earwig's detector does) and warn editors about copyright if so would be an excellent feature. We'd also want instances where the editor declines to change the edit after being warned to be logged for further review. Sometimes there may be no issues (e.g. the text is from a freely licensed source, or is being properly quoted), but often there will be.

Sometimes new editors copy articles from one title to another because they do not know how Special:MovePage works, and are in fact fully unaware of it's existence. It is an false positive for an copy-paste copyvio check.

In T359107#9603044, @Sdkb wrote:

Having the editor automatically check whether text being added already appears elsewhere on the internet (i.e. like Earwig's detector does) and warn editors about copyright if so would be an excellent feature.

Nice...it's helpful to know a feature of this sort resonates in concept, @Sdkb !

We'd also want instances where the editor declines to change the edit after being warned to be logged for further review. Sometimes there may be no issues (e.g. the text is from a freely licensed source, or is being properly quoted), but often there will be.

Mmm, great spot. Can you think of a case where the "logged for further review" process you're alluding to already happens? I ask this wondering if there is something that seems to be working well that we could learn form. [i]

i. Flagged Revisions came to mind. Tho, I assumed you might be referring to something else seeing as how [I don't think?] it is use widely at en.wiki.

In T359107#9603584, @Snaevar wrote:

Sometimes new editors copy articles from one title to another because they do not know how Special:MovePage works, and are in fact fully unaware of it's existence. It is an false positive for an copy-paste copyvio check.

Great spot, @Snaevar! I hadn't considered this case...

Any ideas for how we might mitigate against the case you described? One thought: might we be able to check if the content someone is pasting exists elsewhere within the wiki?

Can you think of a case where the "logged for further review" process you're alluding to already happens?

What I'd envision is some sort of software tag, which community-developed tools could then use to create a feed to check. I'm not involved with copyright patrol enough to know what precedents exist currently, but WikiProject Copyright Cleanup would.

In T359107#9603584, @Snaevar wrote:

Sometimes new editors copy articles from one title to another because they do not know how Special:MovePage works, and are in fact fully unaware of it's existence. It is an false positive for an copy-paste copyvio check.

Worth considering that this is also how "archiving" works for talk pages. Sometimes people have a bot do it, and it's generally going to be in the wikitext editor, but...

Adding === Open questions @Dyolf77_WMF raised offline.

Next steps

Per what @nayoub and I discussed offline today, the main next step is converging on the resolution workflow. Said another way: defining what questions, and subsequence actions, Edit Check will prompt people to engage with prior to the system considering a Check "addressed."

More immediately, the Editing Team will share an initial proposal with and refine it with volunteers on-wiki and through Community Conversations.

Meta: we're renaming this Check "Paste Check" from "CopyVio check" per suggestion @Trizek-WMF made offline.