Hello, I'm
Ifnord. Your recent edit(s) to the page
Charles Boarman appear to have added incorrect information, so they have been removed for now. If you believe the information was correct, please
cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you would like to experiment, please use your
sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thank you.
Ifnord (
talk) 03:09, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Hi Belain1737! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:01, 6 January 2021 (UTC) |
Thank you for your zeal towards improving Wikipedia but some of your recent edits are adding excessive Wikilinks to articles. Please take a look at the Manual of Style article on Linking, specifically the section on Duplicate links MOS:DUPLINK. Thanks, Shearonink ( talk) 21:35, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
Wanted you to know that I reverted your addition of those two external links associated with The Society of the Cincinnati, since they are more associated with the man George Washington rather than the place Mount Vernon. Shearonink ( talk) 04:53, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Belain1737. We
welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things
you have written about in the page
Society of Cincinnati, you may have a
conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the
conflict of interest guideline and
FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:
In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.
Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Horse Eye's Back ( talk) 17:13, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
@ Belain1737: it is not appropriate to address tags like this on the talk page of the editor who placed them, please address them on your own talk page. One benefit of this is that it makes it possible for other editors to have answered the questions. Might I ask how you have so many old and obscure books about the Society by its members if you are not connected to it in any way? Horse Eye's Back ( talk) 16:31, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
Also please don’t edit the pages of your relatives [1] as you did at Charles Boarman. Horse Eye's Back ( talk) 16:35, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
Apologies for the very distant relative article edit. As I indicated then, there are many rules to learn here. The edit I made was to the given name of a classmate, not the distant relative himself, if that matters. I could not locate a definition for "family" in Wikipedia's guidance. Is there a defined degree to which someone is related that Wikipedia uses when determining whether an editor can edit a distant relative's article? If left to an editor's discretion, I would define "family" as a living, immediate family member. I do not own any society books. They are available publicly. It is simply a fascinating subject and all edits are made in good faith. Belain1737 ( talk) 18:07, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
Hello Belain1737! Your additions to
Society of the Cincinnati have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the
public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a
suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see
Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid
copyright and
plagiarism issues.
It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 19:22, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
Please note that there are no complex legal issues involved in this specific case. You copied material from the society's own sites as well as from some anonymous website which fails WP:RS. You didn't know our copyvio rules (although I'd think you'd realise that this might be an issue) or presumably what we consider to be a reliable source. The parts of the above that you need to consider are the introduction and the next two paragraphs. Doug Weller talk 09:34, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Doug Weller talk 20:28, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
Just to let you know I used Wikipedia's copyright violation detector. Doug Weller talk 10:22, 11 February 2021 (UTC)