Republishers reproduce Wikipedia content wholesale in hard copy, usually for profit. The licensing terms may or may not be properly included in the publication. Publications that include some content from a Wikimedia project are not considered as republished.
Using these republishers on Wikipedia
Republishers are not reliable sources and not acceptable external links in articles per the verifiability policy. Articles that use a republished work as a source should be edited to either remove the work or to tag the source with {{Circular-ref}}. Leave {{backwardscopy}} on the article's talk page to identify Wikipedia as the original source.
Legality of republishing
Every contribution to the English Wikipedia has been licensed for re-use, including commercial, for-profit printing in hard copies. Republication is legal, so long as the licenses are complied with.
Effect of non-compliance with licenses
If the license is not complied with, then the republication is a copyright violation. You own the copyright to your contributions, not the Wikimedia Foundation. Legally, the Wikimedia Foundation is in the same position as the republishers (except that the WMF always complies with your license terms), because the WMF is republishing your copyrighted content under your license. If someone violates the terms of the license, then enforcement needs to come from the copyright owner. Consequently, complaints about violations need to be made by a person who actually wrote part of the improperly republished material.
Note: While some republishers do not even attempt to use properly issued ISBNs, noting those that do enables circular refs to be spotted more easily.
All titles reviewed are verbatim reprints of a collection of Wikipedia articles. Some titles state that "some" of the content is in the public domain. Website states that "Each book always has the latest content available on the day of ordering. The content of all book is updated on a perpetual basis." They further state that they have "used its best efforts in collecting, analyzing and preparing data, information and materials for this unique guide." Claiming to be the publisher, they also say that use "for any commercial purposes requires a special written permission from the publisher."
Have emailed the published. And touched base with Amazon
Dear Dr. Heilman and Mr. Cohen We have received your mails concerning text in Understanding and Management of Special Child in Pediatric Dentistry.
We have taken the matter up with the editors of the book and the contributors to the chapter in question.
We take care to ensure the veracity of texts, but in this case our systems appear to have failed. However, we have decided to permanently withdraw the book from sale, and we will remove the title from our website and recall the book from our wholesalers and distributors.
Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention.
Confusingly lists Wikimedia Foundation as the author, though the republisher is not affiliated. Lists names of Wikipedia editors who contributed to the articles.
See the discussion at the Reliable Sources noticeboard: some (not all) books copy from Wikipedia. Do not presume that any book from this publishing house is a reliable source; do not link to copyvio.
Various Global Vision books have raised concerns of copyvio on wikipedia articles, but in each case the article text predates the date the book was published.
"Global Encyclopaedia of Environmental Science Technology and Management" copies extensively from Wikipedia and other sources (see its articles on Affluenza or Afforestation, for example).
"Global Encyclopaedia of Welfare Economics" duplicates content that appeared first on Central limit theorem.
"Encyclopaedic dictionary of Marathi literature" duplicates content that appeared first on various Wikipedia articles (first example: Abhanga).
"Philosophy of scientific creationism" duplicates content that appeared first on Teach the Controversy.
"Indian Administration Vol. 1" duplicates content that first appeared at Bureaucracy.
"History of Afghanistan" duplicates content that appeared first at History of Afghanistan.
Copied from other (non-wikipedia) sources
"Spiritual Value of Social Charity", in which the first visible page of text - apparently written by the publisher themselves - is a direct copy of "History and philosophy of social work in India" (published by somebody else, decades earlier).
A randomly chosen sentence from "Encyclopedic Dictionary of Sanskrit Literature" also appears in a 1996 book from a different source: [4]
"Nuclear weapons and national security: emerging challenges for Asia" copies extensively from [5]
A randomly chosen sentence from "21st Century India : View and Vision " also appears in a 2003 book from a different source: [6]
The first sentences of "Rāvaṇa and Laṅkā", [7] nominally written by R.K. Ramakrishnan, is copied from "India in the Rāmāyaṇa age: a study of the social and cultural conditions in ancient India as described in Vālmīki's Rāmāyaṇa", published 1967 [8]
"Basics of guidance and counselling" appears to copy from a 1984 book by a different Indian publisher which in turn copies from the 1965 "Testing for Teachers".
"Role models in management (leadership and communication)" copies from "Effective Leadership" by Adair
From book descriptions on Amazon: "Hephaestus Books represents a new publishing paradigm, allowing disparate content sources to be curated into cohesive, relevant, and informative books. To date, this content has been curated from Wikipedia articles and images under Creative Commons licensing, although as Hephaestus Books continues to increase in scope and dimension, more licensed and public domain content is being added. We believe books such as this represent a new and exciting lexicon in the sharing of human knowledge."
It is possible to have these books withdrawn from Amazon by complaining, particularly if you are the author of a substantial amount of content on Wikipedia.
It is possible to have these books withdrawn from Amazon by complaining, particularly if you are the author of a substantial amount of content on Wikipedia.
It is possible to have these books withdrawn from Amazon by complaining, particularly if you are the author of a substantial amount of content on Wikipedia.
It is possible to have these books withdrawn from Amazon by complaining, particularly of you are the author of a substantial amount of content on Wikipedia.
