![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 60 | ← | Archive 65 | Archive 66 | Archive 67 | Archive 68 | Archive 69 | Archive 70 |
Hi Diannaa, can you please show me which content was used from " http://www.aina.org/ata/20170503173511.htm"? I got this message last time, and i made sure never to use that webpage for Wikipedia again, both sources I used come from different webpages. Thanks again. Ramsin93 ( talk) 02:43, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
Okay thank you, unfortunately your bot is attributing the article to aina.com, when the article is actually taken from Presbyterian Record, and posted on aina.com, they don't own the copyrights Ramsin93 ( talk) 04:18, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
I meant aina.org sorry Ramsin93 ( talk) 04:22, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, no, I believe Presbyterian Record owns the copyright, but it's been attributed to aina.org because they have reposted the article on their website. Presbyterian Record is no longer in operation as of a couple years ago so I'm not sure where this stands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramsin93 ( talk • contribs) 16:52, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
I understand that, the issue is your bot is attributing the copyright based on it's presumption of the copyright being owned by aina.org, did you even visit the webpage to see what the website looks like?
It clearly states that the article is taken from Presbyterian Record, right on the aina.org webpage your bot is attributing it to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramsin93 ( talk • contribs) 03:10, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
Correct me if I'm wrong but the job of an administrator is to investigate false positives like this, claiming that aina.org owns the copyrights by confirming what your bot concluded based on an algorithm is incorrect. Consider further investigation before incorrectly attributing the copyright to a website based on what a computer program has presumed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramsin93 ( talk • contribs) 03:25, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
"Reverend Dr. Isaac Adams organized two resettlement projects of Assyrians from Urmia, one in 1903 and 1906 of which, unlike many other ethnic groups at the time, composed of families and not just men. The Assyrians, led by their minister, were the first Presbyterians in the region", which I re-worded to say
"Reverend Dr. Isaac Adams organized two groups of Assyrian immigrants from Urmia, one in 1903 and 1906. Unlike many other immigrant groups at the time, the settlers were composed of families and not just men. They were the first Presbyterians in the region."That's all I did. — Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 11:12, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
Their stalwart leader, the Reverend Dr. Isaac Adams, organized two resettlement projects in Canada, one in 1903 near Battleford, and one in 1906 about eight miles northeast of the first settlement. Importantly, unlike many other ethnic groups, these settlements were composed of families, not men only.
Reverend Dr. Isaac Adams organized two resettlement projects of Assyrians from Urmia, one in 1903 and 1906 of which, unlike many other ethnic groups at the time, composed of families and not just men.
— Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 11:26, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
Great thanks
Ramsin93 ( talk) 13:50, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar |
Thanks for the message you left at my talk page regarding Wikipedia and copyright Taha Wasiq 18:11, 1 November 2019 (UTC) |
Afternoon Diannaa -
The wording for the C. Bruce Littlejohn article came from the finding aid for his collection at South Carolina Political Collections at the University of South Carolina, where I work. The finding aid is not copyrighted and is free and open for public use at any time. I have no vested interest in Littlejohn looking good on a Wikipedia page, but I did want to add in information that would link him to other pages that would help discovery. I can reword if necessary.
Annieca
Annieca2016 ( talk) 19:22, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
You might check the edits of:
Both have used aina.org, both edit in Assyrian articles, and both have plagiarized from aina.org.
The Editor Interaction Analyser shows 14 similar articles edited, excluding your talk page. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 03:42, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
Except further investigation would show you that aina.org is actually the one plagiarizing copyright content on their site, that's why the bots are alerting you to copyright infringements. In some cases you aren't looking far enough to see that aina.org is using content from a seperate source that, when used in Wikipedia, is assuming aina.org is the copyright holder due to the program you guys are running to come to these conclusions, and not doing the proper investigation. Ramsin93 ( talk) 05:31, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
I've never actually used aina.org directly as a source, your program is assuming that aina.org is the copyright holder of the content and you aren't doing the proper investigation required, very unprofessional!
Ramsin93 (
talk) 05:41, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments. You can check that I report citations between "". https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/apr/12/julian-assange-charges-press-freedom-journalism
So if you have solutions to report citations without "", I will apply them. I would like report exactly the comments of these academics and campaigners to drop confusions. Again, thank you Rebecca jones ( talk) 13:32, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
In the article, the journalist reports their comments between ""
“Many of the allegations fall absolutely within the first amendment’s protections of journalistic activity. That’s very troubling to us.” Among the phrases contained in the indictment that have provoked an uproar are:
“It was part of the conspiracy that Assange encouraged Manning to provide information and records from departments and agencies of the United States.” It is a basic function of journalism to encourage sources to provide information in the public interest on the activities of government. “It was part of the conspiracy that Assange and Manning took measures to conceal Manning as the source of the disclosure of classified records to WikiLeaks.” Protecting the anonymity of sources is the foundation stone of much investigative and national security reporting – without it sources would not be willing to divulge information, and the press would be unable to fulfill its role of holding power to account. “It was part of the conspiracy that Assange and Manning used the ‘Jabber’ online chat service to collaborate on the acquisition and dissemination of the classified records.” The indictment similarly refers to a dropbox. Both Jabber and Dropbox are communication tools routinely used by journalists working with whistleblowers.
{{
PD-notice}}
as part of your citation. —
Diannaa 🍁 (
talk) 13:43, 2 November 2019 (UTC)Thanks Diannaa, for removing some text, which may have gone under the copy radar. Took it from the uni, and maybe I should have rewritten better. Anyhow, I guess noone will ever ask for more info on the subject, so good you removed the text. Dan Koehl ( talk) 19:30, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi, you previously removed and revdel'd copyright content from R.U.N. (Cirque du Soleil); could you do so again? 104.58.119.117 ( talk · contribs) has twice added promotional material as content to the article; it is a word-for-word copy of text that is here. Many thanks! Dorsetonian ( talk) 08:35, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I've been working on reviewing the templates from
Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 October 16#Article content templates by Ephert and have dealt with all the ones I'm confident about the copyright status, however I'm unsure how to handle very close copies of tables from copyright protected works. I've done some searching and found some things that discussions that says it's not a copyright violation such as
Wikipedia:Media copyright questions/Archive/2012/October#Reproduce a graph from a book and discussions that indicate it isn't such as
User talk:Ephert#Data table. There's also the following quote from
Wikipedia:Image use policy: Technical data is uncopyrightable, lacking creativity, but the presentation of data in a graph or chart can be copyrighted, so a user-made version should be sufficiently different in presentation from the original to remain free.
The question then is whether this conversion to a MediaWiki table is "sufficiently different in presentation" to be free. Any help or pointers where to go would be appreciated! ‑‑
Trialpears (
talk) 14:28, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
Trialpears, thank you for dealing with these; I should have been the one doing it but I've been busy lately. However, was the deletion of Template:He2012Table2 justified? Its source was under a CC license as far as I can remember. Nardog ( talk) 15:11, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
Remaining templates
|
---|
These first seven are copied unaltered from the cited sources; these are scientific study results which are pretty esoteric measurements that the general reader will not care about or understand, so it's not worth our while to try to convert the data to prose.
|
@ Trialpears: My opinions are within the collapsed section. Sorry for the delay in replying. — Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 21:15, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Hey, Diannaa. First all, I'm terribly sorry to disturb you, but I need help from an experienced admin. On July 27, 2019, I came across an article without a poster. As I always do in these cases, I upload one in low resolution to comply with the fair-use policy. On November 1, 2019, another user uploaded another version of the same poster and edited it into the article. He removed "my poster" from the infobox and put it into the "cast" section. An admin came across the article and he saw both images, realizing that this is against the fair-use policy he nominated "my poster" to deletion. It is my understanding that the older image should be kept and the newer one should be deleted, since (in my view) the newer image should not even have been uploaded. Since the article already had one poster uploaded under the fair use policy. I tried to contact the admin without success. Now, the same user who uploaded the newer version of the poster came to the image I uploaded in July and uploaded a new version of the image (the same version he uploaded on Nov. 1) with a high quality, which in my view, don't comply with the fair-use policy. It seems a mess right now. I don't know if I was clear, but I need someone to look into it (if you can, obviously). Regards.-- SirEdimon ( talk) 21:19, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence |
...for being the Finger of Fate pointing at the evil of WP:COPYVIO. ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 22:19, 4 November 2019 (UTC) |
Thank you, I think :/ — Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 23:30, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello @ Diannaa:, you recently removed content from Anant Parekh because of a perceived copyvio. However, the text copied is available under CC license as per:
“All text published under the heading 'Biography' on Fellow profile pages is available under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.” -- Royal Society Terms, conditions and policies at the Wayback Machine (archived 2016-11-11)
Although this copyright notice does not appear on the page at https://royalsociety.org/people/anant-parekh-14114/ it is available under a creative commons license if you read the text at https://royalsociety.org/about-us/terms-conditions-policies/ under the heading "Intellectual Property Rights" Duncan.Hull ( talk) 05:54, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for your note about South Australia Act 1834. I'll have another go at it, but if you look at the highlighted text, you will see that what Earwig has picked up consists in many instances of the same text used repeatedly, in particular the long name of the Act "An Act to empower His Majesty to erect South Australia into a British Province or Provinces..." (which actually I now see that I should have used the Z version of the spelling of colonisation there, which will make it match even more closely!) and repetition of "Province of South Australia" (unavoidable). There's a bit of factual reproduction such as "South Australia thus became the only Colony authorised by an Act of Parliament" (repeated on many other sites too) - but not a lot of actual paraphrasing. Anyway, I'll attempt to reduce the matching word count by having another go later... Laterthanyouthink ( talk) 02:50, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
Requesting revdelete at Dominican War of Independence and Parsley massacre due to massive copyvios. 185.213.21.15 ( talk) 03:19, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
"If you want to import media (including text) that you have found elsewhere, and it does not meet the non-free content policy and guideline, you can only do so if it is public domain or available under terms that are compatible with the CC BY-SA license."
The text I imported at The Assyrian Tragedy is in the public domain, therefore permissible under Wikipedia's rules. Ramsin93 ( talk) 22:32, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
{{
PD-notice}}
after your citation. I have done so for the above article. Please do this in the future so that patrollers as well as our readers will be aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself, and that it's okay to copy verbatim. Thanks, —
Diannaa 🍁 (
talk) 22:40, 6 November 2019 (UTC) There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Ramsin93 (
talk •
contribs) 23:00, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
I very carefully paraphrased and did NOT copy the sentences from Vox Media and The New York Times. I avoided WP:Synthesis, since I know that's important. Previously you showed logs of bots calling information possibly guilty of copyright infringement. Please show those logs for the additions I made. A good wikipedia is of life or death importance to me, so I do not want to see worthwhile information deleted. DouggCousins ( talk) 02:47, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, thank you for leaving the detailed message on my page. I actually work for ASM, so copyright and plagiarism is not an issue. What type of documentation can I provide to prove that I have permission post this content so that it won't be deleted again? Also, I can't remember exactly what was deleted at this point since we made so many changes. Is there a way for me to access the version that I created before it was deleted? Here's the URL to the page: /info/en/?search=American_Society_for_Microbiology Thank you! Tyniahcm ( talk) 19:05, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi Dianna, thank you for the clarification. I activated my Wikipedia email. If you could please send me the old revision of the page that would be great. Thanks! Tyniahcm ( talk) 14:27, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
The part of the Faith school article that you removed for copyright I actually copied from the Wikipedia page on Catholic Education Service, I didn't realise it was directly from their website. I'm wondering if it's not allowed in the faith school article, why is it allowed in the CES article or should it not be there either. FormularSumo ( talk) 19:11, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
I have never gone on that website in my entire life. The only websites I used for that Wiki page was the Pluralone official website. When I was reading that you said I copied off of it, I was like "What the hell?". That's kinda like just assuming I copied info off of it, instead of going to the source where I got it from and confirming what I said on the wiki page was true. Also, if it does seem like it is copied off of that website, it was 100% accidental and again, I got the sources from the official Pluralone website detailing the single release, which is here: https://pluralone.merchnow.com/products/v2/294600/io-sono-quel-che-sono-bw-menina-mulher-da-pele-preta-7-black Midcey —Preceding undated comment added 21:41, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi Dianna. Maybe you can help sort this out? It looks like a WP:MIRROR but I can't be for sure. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 23:05, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
this is the source cc by 4.0 (you have to scroll to the bottom) [1] and this is the edit giving attribution for the screenshot [2], thank you-- Ozzie10aaaa ( talk) 03:24, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
May be a good hearted editor trying to get some counts up. Stop User_talk:58.182.172.95#Copying_within_Wikipedia_requires_attribution here. Not tagging you with bad stuff. If filter or tool is flawed, not an excuse for any editor to BLINDLY use it, you arfe guilty for using it as misuse if you blindly used it. 58.182.172.95 ( talk) 12:48, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa, this could be a bigger mess - could you check the edits of this user please? It seems like most/all of them are copypastes or plagiarizing their source papers (just searching random keywords and unique phrases reveals numerous clear hits). I looked through the listings of 3-4 of the sources and none of them seem to have any CC license or something similar, but I am not entirely sure. The speed of some of these edits also indicate a copypaste job. I have left the user a copyright notice for now as first information about this possible issue. GermanJoe ( talk) 21:30, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I have removed text added on 27 February 2019 which appears to have been copied from https://www.ucy.ac.cy/techsrv/en/building-facilities/university-campus/projects-under-construction/20-en-articles/top-menu/building-facilities/136-learning-resource-centre-stelios-ioannou and https://www.metalocus.es/en/news/emerging-earth-jean-nouvel-completes-stelios-ioannou-learning-resource-center. Please can you see if I have missed anything and revision delete. I have posted a message to the user. TSventon ( talk) 10:26, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Re NY Times and portland mercury deletions. The large guidelines left on my talk page are not very helpful. I already thought I only quoted a small amount of the sources, and properly quoted them. I'll try to use even smaller quotes, but without specific definition of "small" this is obviously a guessing game. -- Yae4 ( talk) 17:50, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Heads up that the edits you revdel’ed for copyright issues have been re-introduced by the same user, Sandeep Kr Jangid. The same looks to be true at Bhusawar. — MarkH21 ( talk) 19:22, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi again, Diannaa. You mentioned that Earwig has a tool for reading New York Times articles without reaching the newspaper's article limit. Since that would be handy for checking sources, would you mind giving me the link? Thanks and all the best, Mini apolis 03:06, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, can you please address the history of this page which has significant copying without attribution. Thanks. Home Lander ( talk) 21:47, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.
216.130.236.20 (
talk) 00:35, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
There is an editor using bot software to find female scientists and remove their pages, can you please help prevent this on the article Kate Killick — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schlossbergfes ( talk • contribs)
Hi Diannaa!
I hope you're doing well. I appreciate the notification and the links that you have sent me on my talk page. I'm currently reading through the links to learn about how to avoid copyright issues. I just wanted some more information on what section was removed so that I can make sure I don't make the same mistake moving forward. Thanks for your time! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sikderadiba8 ( talk • contribs) 19:55, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for your helpful guidance. I will have another go (possibly not today) at putting the information in, but in an acceptable manner. Perhaps you could keep an eye on this and let me know if I have resolved the problem? Many thanks, JamesHT1967 ( talk) 22:28, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
Incidentally, I had included a quotation from the formal objects of a registered company, which are a matter of public record; would it not be misleading to do anything but quote them exactly? Or did I need to word my citation in a particular way, to show that this was what I had done? Many thanks, -- JamesHT1967 ( talk) 22:42, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa,
maybe this question is technical. But there is either a glitch, or I completely miss the mark on this one.
I am currently working on Bruce Lee's page which is full of odd and poorly cited info.
Now the info box is odd because aside from the profile picture there is a second photo was added which I would gladly keep in the article. I have never seen two photos in ones inbox section. Also his infobox is huge and that would be a way to reduce it.
I need a senior member to look at this because I can't find anyways to remove it.
Thank you. Filmman3000 ( talk) 23:28, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
| image =
parameter prevents the image from Wikidata from being imported. —
Diannaa 🍁 (
talk) 00:28, 14 November 2019 (UTC)Hey there Dianna!
Could I please have a copy of the deleted page linked above? I'll be sure to clean it up well before it gets posted to Draft:Charles P. Roland. I guess it had like 11+ sources, so it sounds like it'd be notable.
Kindest Regards, – MJL ‐Talk‐ ☖ 00:33, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I am wondering why my recent contributions to Reverse glass painting are struck through in that page's history. I note that most or all of my actual edits, by my recollection, are still included in the article.
Since only you have edited the article after I did, I assume that you are the one who can explain this to me. I hope that is so, because otherwise I find the process of determining who to contact to uncover this mystery (to me, anyway) to be inexplicable. Thanks! Larry Koenigsberg ( talk) 05:05, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
Why did you try to restore a link to a portal which was deleted by consensus? [3]
And why did you not leave an edit summary explaining your reason? -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 01:50, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa. There is currently a workshop going on about the creation of a new Portal Guideline: User talk:Scottywong/Portal guideline workspace. Your insights and ideas would be appreciated. -- Sm8900 ( talk) 03:57, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, Thank you for reviewing the article- /info/en/?search=Draft:Yasser_Hareb previously. The article has been pending for more than 8 weeks in the draft. Please, could you review it as all credible citations have been added. ( Salmabadrmaged ( talk) 07:51, 15 November 2019 (UTC)).
Hello Diannaa, could you offer some advice about the copyright aspect of links to enacademic.com please? A list of all currently used links is here, per cross-Wiki linksearch. The site consists of copypaste extracts from various encyclopedias and dictionaries (some reliable, some not like Wikipedia). See Jogendra Singh for a recent usage. While convenient, such links contradict WP:LINKVIO (most of the republished information on enacademic.com seems to be under copyright, and the extensive copypasting of large amounts of content is beyond any reasonable "fair use" claims, even for US standards). Should such links be deleted or maybe the domain be blacklisted to avoid further good-faith misuse? GermanJoe ( talk) 10:30, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello, I saw you reverted and revdel'd a revision that added quotes from state documents. I'm a bit confused as, for all I can find, states can't copyright rules and laws. Thanks, Kb03 ( talk) 18:47, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
I saw you deleted a bunch of content on Marilyn White for copyvio. Could you direct me to the source the copyviolator used so I might put it to use. Trackinfo ( talk) 07:15, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar | |
But of course. Thank you many times over 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 15:30, 16 November 2019 (UTC) |
Thank you!— Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 20:50, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
Hey there, thank you correcting my edits, I am new to editing on Wikipedia, and wasn't aware of the rules in question. I will keep those in mind for the future.
Ashlesh007 (
talk) 17:32, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
If you can, [4]. Thank you, 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 20:40, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
Our friend Ilija zmikic seems to have ignored our messages on his/her talk page and restored the copyvio text to the Dynasty season articles here and here, at the same time reverting interim edits without explanation. I've reverted, but did you previously attempt to erase the copyvios from the edit history? Also I believe Ilija zmikic created Dynasty (1981 TV series, season 3) without following your instructions re: attribution. If this editing behavior continues I suppose I'll got to ARV. thanks.— TAnthony Talk 01:57, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
I just pulled out my DVDs and will check all of the seasons against the main list. So far S4 seems to be original so that's good.— TAnthony Talk 15:28, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
I don't quite understand your copyright notice and the message you left on my talk page "... policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing." When you removed my changes you used a link to prove that the content I added was copyrighted. But in that link this text appears:
"Copyright: © 2013 Toronchuk and Ellis. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in other forums, provided the original authors and source are credited and subject to any copyright notices concerning any third-party graphics etc."
So, as I checked the copyright of the article before I posted the list I must have read the copyright notice differently from you. I could write the author and ask about it? Or write the journal itself? But either way I'm a bit confused about this. I also changes their wording a bit, but not much. JurijFedorov ( talk) 14:33, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
Excuse me but I don't think the removal of my edits are justified. For instance, the autapomorphies of Austroraptor were copied exactly as the original paper, and yet, they are still being shown without any kind of warn, and I'm pretty sure that more pages are in the same margin without notice. If this has to do something with the papers being accesible or not, Turner et al. 2012 is currently accesible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PaleoNeolitic ( talk • contribs) 14:49, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
Considering the amount of disruption caused over the past year I fully agree with your block of BHG. The lack of courtesy shown you (professional or common) in the absence of consultation concerning the unblock is very unbecoming. The fact that the reasoning behind your block, in the unblock notice, was not even acknowledged shows a lack of understanding of our block policies, and again, is sub-optimal of what we expect in our admins. I for one applaud your efforts to reduce the disruption here. — Ched ( talk) 23:43, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa. Would you mind taking a look at St Martin's Church, Bladon#Spencer-Churchill graves? Is it OK to include an entire poem (or this much of an extract) in that particular section? I can't find out any information about the poet and have no idea whether he/she is still living; so, there's no way to know when the poem was written or whether it might still be eligible for copyright protection. The source cited in the article does say that a poem by Avril was read, but it doesn't give the entire poem and only states where the poem can be found in a supporting footnote. It's probably the poem, but I'm not sure if it's licensed in a way that allows it added to Wikipedia (either in it's entirety or as an extract). Moreover, I found this via Google Books which seems to say that the poem was written specifically for the occasion, and gives three of the four stanzas appearing in the Wikipedia article. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 01:03, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
Thanks for cleaning the floor on your shift. — Bagumba ( talk) 05:36, 18 November 2019 (UTC) |
Thank you, Bagumba!— Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 07:08, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
Just wanted to let you know about a new request for arbitration. The request is at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Conduct in portal space and portal deletion discussions. please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. -- Sm8900 ( talk) 20:11, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi @ Diannaa:, thank you for the changes and marking apparent copyright violations on my work on Dr.Reza Dana's page. However, I received these images directly from the subject of the biographical article i.e. Dr.Reza Dana's office. What should I do to prove that I am legally allowed to post these images from the subject himself? Thanks! User:Texan1984
Hi @ Diannaa:, I don't understand why you have removed the information I placed (and referenced) on the Alexander von Humboldt page about his influence on educators. The information comes from my published research in a peer-reviewed journal. None of the wording violates copyright, because the wording is paraphrased and the source is referenced. I'm not paid to write this, nor will I receive any financial benefit from providing this information. Am I triggering a copyright notice simply because I haven't created an account? Is that necessary? Can you replace the deleted text? Thanks for considering the questions.
Dianna, the information was not copied directly from the source paper--I used my own words to explain the information. This is not a self-published source -- the paper I cited was published by Taylor and Francis Publishers. Again, I respectfully ask that you reconsider removing the information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.100.61 ( talk) 01:25, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Dianna, can you please provide the Wikipedia policy that states the author of a published secondary source cannot add information to Wikipedia and cite his/her own work? I just haven't seen that anywhere. I'm having a hard time believing that, for example, Kip Thorne, who won a Breakthrough Prize for the discovery of gravity waves, couldn't add content about gravity waves to Wikipedia and cite some of his own published work. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.100.61 ( talk) 03:52, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Dianne, Wikipedia's policy defines "original research" as self-published work. Here's the wording: "Wikipedia articles must not contain original research. The phrase "original research" (OR) is used on Wikipedia to refer to material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist.[a]" A reliable, published source is an academic journal or scholarly book that requires peer review, and these are the sorts of sources I am citing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.100.61 ( talk) 04:45, 19 November 2019 (UTC) Also, here's Wikipedia's language on "citing yourself": Shortcut WP:SELFCITE Using material you have written or published is allowed within reason, but only if it is relevant, conforms to the content policies, including WP:SELFPUB, and is not excessive. Citations should be in the third person and should not place undue emphasis on your work. You will be permanently identified in the page history as the person who added the citation to your own work. When in doubt, defer to the community's opinion: propose the edit on the article's talk page and allow others to review it. However, adding numerous references to work published by yourself and none by other researchers is considered to be a form of spamming.
My references conform to the content policies. I'm not citing self-published work. My citations are not excessive, and they are not in third person.
Thanks Diana--I didn't realize I could do that, since I'm new to Wikipedia. All the best.
Hi Diannaa. I've added you as a party to the Portals arbitration request for your block of BHG. I think this is relevant to the case as BHG seems to be a central figure and your input would help resolve the dispute. I hope this doesn't cause you any stress. In real life I'm an expert witness and am routinely involved in a dozen lawsuits at a time. For those not used to such procedures, dispute resolution can be nerve wracking. For what it's worth, you do not appear to have done anything wrong. Jehochman Talk 04:15, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa, thank you for your recent post on my talk page in relation to a potential copyright issue of my addition to the Canadian Forces Intelligence Command. My apologies for any misunderstanding on my part but I was under the belief that adding information from Wikipedia:Public domain content is acceptable as per Wikipedia:Copying_text_from_other_sources#Can_I_copy_from_open_license_or_public_domain_sources? The source of my addition is the Canadian Government website for the Canadian Forces Intelligence Command which is therefore information in the public domain. Could you please clarify this for me - my apologies for my ignorance about this matter. - Jacarandacounsel ( talk) 15:02, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
If you can bear my bringing up something which probably seemed to be over, I have reconsidered my recent unblocking, and decided I was wrong. It may be debatable how much I should be blamed for not searching through the page history, but I now think I have no excuse for not consulting you. I have had previous experiences where a block seemed to me completely unreasonable, but I went through the courtesy of consulting the blocking admin nevertheless, and it turned out there was more justification than had been visible to me, so I should know better. I honestly cannot think why I didn't do the same this time. (However, things have now moved on to another forum, and it may be that both the block and the unblock will have made little if any difference in the long run.) JBW ( talk) Formerly JamesBWatson 09:38, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, sorry to bother you - could you cast a quick eye over File:CadmusStamp.jpg? The uploader attests that it's copyright-free since it's a 1901 stamp, but it contains an embedded copyright watermark, and has obviously been copied directly from this website. I'm going to remove it from the article it's used in (since it's obviously an image of a different ship), but should I flag the image file in some way? Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 21:18, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, would you please review this report and consider acting it. Thanx, - FlightTime ( open channel) 23:57, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
user:113.29.230.199 is abusing her talkpage. CLCStudent ( talk) 00:17, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
Hey Diannaa, Can you elaborate on what attribution template to use on which sources in the Draft:Orbit Logic
Is there a proper license for this? I can't find it. Thanks.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 14:59, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for your messages on this subject. I was the sole author of the prose that I copied in the two instances that you have cited. Corker1 ( talk) 20:20, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for the heads up.( Angunnu ( talk) 11:23, 23 November 2019 (UTC))
Hello
Can you please explain why you removed references to Mary McAleese, Camerlengo and Bishop Michael J Bransfield from his Wiki page. All content was linked to reputable sources and no infringement of copyright. I would be grateful if you could explain why this important and relevant content was removed. Lucs Rossi ( talk) 15:19, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
I am the owner of the copyright material you removed from my pages: Pet and Alexander D. Henderson Jr. articles. I have sent an permission email to [email protected]. I have also posted the WP:COIDEC on my user page and placed a notice on the source material with the following disclaimer: The text is available for modification and reuse under the terms of the: Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License and the GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts). Please restore the content when the email is received and processed by the OTRS team. Thanks, Greg Henderson 18:35, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello, sahitya.assist is also my user,so now what is the procedure for giving attribution.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sahitya.work ( talk • contribs)
Hi Diannaa! I saw a recommendation from you via my phone but don't see it via my laptop on the Intercourse discussion page. That's a head-scratcher. I've read over past discussion arguing for and against long/longer/too long quotes (from the book in particular). Before I engage more on this topic, is there a single place/page where your recent comment on the subject and any reply by me, and other recent discussion, all appropriately co-exist? I'm still learning (a lot!) about what goes where, re: discussion. Thanks. And I love the Imagine artwork. :) -- PaulThePony ( talk) 03:08, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
That's good news, Diannaa, as I just added two passages that I think meet the criteria but please let me know if they don't. -- PaulThePony ( talk) 14:01, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
Thanks Dianna For clearing up the copyright and plagiarism content from my page A & F Harvey Brothers. Looks like other editors have added contents to the original page which I had created. Thanks a lot for notifying me. Glittershield ( talk) 14:52, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
Sure ,I realise my mistake, form next time I will be more careful.Thank you Glittershield ( talk) 15:09, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa. Is this content under the copyleft license? Puduḫepa 17:38, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
hi Diannaa i changed all the data which is copied from Hyderabad Central article and i updated proper reference for this CMR Central article but now article is facing problem that proposed for delete could u please help me. Jeevan naidu ( talk) 07:14, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa. I have left you a message on my talk page regarding some of the text on the article Jacob O. Meyer. Thanks In Citer ( talk) 15:54, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
Could I bring this to your attention? Many thanks! Dorsetonian ( talk) 09:21, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
Thank you so much for both the welcome and your feedback on the Human migration article. Even though I am a beginner at this, this page deserves to be a lot more up to date than it is and I will be working on improving it in the coming weeks. I just republished the regional paragraphs with a little less text, made sure the links worked to the public domain document, and straightened out citations. Let me know if you think it is still out of order. Ajs050208 ( talk) 17:03, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello! So, I am looking at one particular user's contributions to search and destroy copyvio. And, I came across this article: Kodava people. Earwig says it's a massive copyvio, and the flagged content was added by the user I'm investigating. The report is here. The first one (sorry, spam blacklist blocked the url) looks like a source that copies from wikipedia and the website sounds like one which would host public domain content only, and yet it says copyright 2019 at the bottom of the page (my thoughts on this were before I knew it's spam blacklisted, IDK what to think now). This one looks like a proper copyrighted material and it says it was written by someone with a PhD in 2004 but I am wondering if it is hosting something from 100 year old book or something which would have copyright expired. Any thoughts? TIA! Usedtobecool TALK ✨ 15:53, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for your review of Draft:System of Air Quality and Weather Forecasting (SAFAR). I was wondering where can I see the diff of changes? In revision history the revisions seem to be deleted. MayankBomb ( talk) 02:48, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
Understood the changes, you can delete the revisions now. MayankBomb ( talk) 15:03, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar |
Thanks MayankBomb ( talk) 15:04, 1 December 2019 (UTC) |
i don't understand, the copy from http://www.hindupedia.com/en/Lalitha_Sahasranamam is not copyrighted, the disclaimer and the privacy policy are empty. That does qualify it as public domain as its defined to be the state of belonging or being available to the public as a whole, especially through not being subject to copyright or other legal restrictions. where did this go wrong ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sagarns ( talk • contribs) 19:31, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi, Diannaa. How are you doing? It seems to me that the introduction ("Elena and Jake meet by chance on New Year's Eve, arguing for the same taxi. However, instead of going their separate ways after sharing a taxi, they start a passionate relationship. Within weeks they are living together, and not long after they talk about starting a family. But, as the seasons pass, reality catches up with them. Falling in love was the easy part, but can they remain in love when life doesn't give them everything they hoped for?") of Only You (2018 film) is a COPYVIO. Can you check it out? Regards.-- SirEdimon ( talk) 19:38, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
Hey Dianne, I'm new to wikipedia and believe that I made a mistake when citing on this page. I understand that one of my added sections has been removed for this reason. However, when I go back to old versions of the page it looks like its been permanently deleted - could I access these pages again so that I can cite them properly? I had some good material there which I only saved on the Wiki domain (as I didnt save it to my laptop). Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by English Singh ( talk • contribs) 21:11, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
Thank you and please send :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by English Singh ( talk • contribs) 21:47, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for your recent input. An expected outcome, I think. But you might want to also have a look at this. Thanks. Martinevans123 ( talk) 14:36, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for pointing out my copyright violation on the Mission to Zyxx page. I didn't realize the episode descriptions were copyright but that totally makes sense. Hope you have a great rest of your day. Brsmith19 ( talk) 15:42, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
The full citation is being removed. [5] [6] I recommend the edit history be deleted.
The content is license under CC BY 4.0 according to the journal. [7]
See discussion. [8] QuackGuru ( talk) 13:12, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
{{
predatory}}
template? Is this journal/website considered to be a reliable source or not? Is the material released under CC-by or is it public domain? Attribution is required either way, but a violation of the terms of the CC-by license and a copyright violation are not the same thing, so revision deletion is not appropriate. —
Diannaa 🍁 (
talk) 13:41, 4 December 2019 (UTC)Hi Diannaa I have just been reviewing my back email and realized I have not replied to your email below...
"Hello SwannanMan, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to Margaret Rioch 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."
I am actually the author of the copyrighted material from my book on Harry Stack Sullivan and personally hold the copyright. What can I do to restore the page material for the Sullivan wiki-site?
Many thanks for your assistance.
Best
SwannanMan ( talk) 16:18, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
SwannanMan
File:DBs-TheSoundofMusic.jpg. Thanks. ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 18:08, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
An IP editor has added plagiarized material to The Grudge (2020 film) page: [12]. I believe it is the same information you had previous deleted. – wallyfromdilbert ( talk) 19:07, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for the message Diana. I will make an effort to write more on my own. Although I did not realize I had submitted the page for review. I had meant to just save as a draft because I wasn’t finished working on rewriting. How can I simply save it as a draft ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nlinnert ( talk • contribs) 18:28, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia_talk:Copyrights#Use_of_External_Links_and_citations_to_link_to_scanned_technical_manuals,_documents_and_others Hello Diannaa, I have previously pinged you on this matter. I have moved the discussion to Copyright talk page. I would appreciate your input, so it can be of future reference. Graywalls ( talk) 10:03, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
Hello: could you please scrub some copyvio from the history of page? This diff contains the copyvio'd material, from the New Yorker, which I removed. Here is the Earwig comparison to the New Yorker article. Thanks as always! ThatMontrealIP ( talk) 22:01, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
I see you've asked to Bogong56 to not copy and paste from this website, but it appears to be released under a license that seems to be compatible. Am I missing something or is the license not compatible? 15:08, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
I will just add a section that has a spelling correction Helper to Hepler. Thanks for your comment ~~>Binary Photon
Hello Diannaa, You had removed the entirety of the edits to A & F Harvey Brothers under claim of copyright, the reason in your edit history being "copied" from a website. However I did not directly "copy" the text, besides a handful of quotations which were marked as quotations.
Instead, I spent several hours rewriting the entire thing to be to the point, and researching additional information. There were multiple sources from other locations. The photograph was public domain as copyright expired.
One of your comments on my talk page was that I must "put all information in (my) own words and structure". --Which is what I did, having re-written it from scratch, removed some irrelevant details, etc. It was impossible to change EVERY word as some appeared to be technical terms relating to the industry and I did not wish to change them without full understanding.
As for the image added, it was of one of the two founders, who lived between 1850 and 1905. The man was in his 20's or 30's, which dates the image approx 1870 or 1880. This puts the image at around 150 years old, and well within public domain.
I feel that instead of simply blanket deleting an entire article, small edits or removals could have been made to specific problem areas.
Can you please either revert this revision, allow it to be merged into the current version, or provide some further insight as to your reasoning for the revision? cheers syn ❀ 01:49, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I'm currently doing a GOCE c/e of this article and I've come across some text that was directly copied from here, complete with an obvious error I was checking. The website is all rights reserved and doesn't credit Wikipedia as a source. I notice you've rev-deleted lots of historical versions (thank you) but I'll be asking you to do some more revdels once I've done my c/e and checked the history, which may already be hidden of course. There might be more sources involved but I can't check them all. Thanks, Baffle☿gab 02:00, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi,
It appears you that you handled the edits I made to the page anti-communism [13]
I added thousands of characters worth of content to the page, and I regret that I did not more thoroughly put things in my own words. [14]
Is there any way I can review the text? I would like to make future modifications to the article based on the earlier edits I made that got removed. Mmmmmpizza ( talk) 06:38, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
F.Y.I. It looks like the copyvio you removed in October is back and the editor doesn't understand what is wrong (they left a msg on the article talk page). MB 14:47, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
I tried to get in contact with Diannaa telling that the information I put on the ICAS Wiki page is the correct one and open to the public, so I cannot see any problems with copyright issues. Nevertheless I'm blocked out of this page now and the information on it is toatally wrong. But since I'm blocked out I cannot correct it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bo1958 ( talk • contribs) 11:17, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
Dear Diannaa, how can I assure you that I'm working for this organisation and every information I put online has no copyright by ICAS? If you study our website you'll notice that all of our material provided is free to read for every user. Only if an person want's to use some of the content from the papers we publish we ask them to contact the respective authors directly. But again, all information about ICAS is totally copyright free. And I don't see any problems with the informaation I put online, e.g. all the congress data. If that would be a copyright issue then the information about congresses which is presently online would have the same problem. I thought Wiki is made for making information public to everyone. And since we are a non profit organisation we do that as well. But it would help if users get incomplete or totally false information about us as it is right now. So I ask you to please unblock me from editing this page and putting the information which was on there before the latest change also back online. If that would be a technical problem I could do that as well but obviously only if I'm unblocked. Thanks Bo1958 ( talk) 09:22, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa, hope you're well. I just got a notification that i have added copyright material. Would like to clear this issue out. 1) The article & the biography posted here was initially posted on Wikipedia but the article was taken down due to less references probably an year or two ago. Therefore the article was on wikipedia & it got copied to a lot of different websites. I can write down a copyright thing for wikipedia by taking permission from the the person himself. Requesting you to please revert the article back 2) The pictures are a public property & they don't have copyright issues. I have the permission to use them 3) I'm adding more references w /info/en/?search=Draft:Aleem_Zafar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiraali87 ( talk • contribs) 14:21, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi, just to clearify i'm not directly or indirectly linked with the person. The reason i got to know was becuase its copied on a lot of websites moreover about the pictures i said because anyone can get in touch with the person & ask for the permission its not a copyrighted material as far as i know. Can you please send me the or atleast revert the article back so i can edit it & submit it again — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiraali87 ( talk • contribs) 17:26, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
This user was previously blocked from editing some pages. He's again started to vandalise pages Kayastha and Chitraguptavanshi Kayastha by either adding poor content with no source or citing dubious sources, poor formatting and non-so-nuetral tone which has resulted in significant drop in readability and overall quality of these articles over past few days. OMG! When I undid his edits he happened to report me. I am a new editor so I don't know what to do in such scenarios, please look into the matter! Any suggestion from your side? Sattvic7 ( talk) 08:05, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
You wrote: "Your additions to Indian National Congress 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. "
Source: http://www.legalserviceindia.com/copyright/historical-book.htm
IN MY OPINION YOU WANT TO HIDE FACT THAT "IT WAS BRITISH IDEA TO FORM CONGRESS PARTY". HENCE IF ANYONE TRIED TO WRITE TRUTH IT IS IMMEDIATELY DELETED DUE TO VESTED POLITICAL INTEREST. NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES YOU DELETE WIKI CONTENT HISTORY & TRUTH CANNOT REMAIN HIDDEN. INTERNET IS TOO BIG ...BIGGER THAN WIKI. Prashanna01 ( talk) 08:46, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
Dear Diannaa,
I'm working for the International Council of Aeronautical Sciences so I can assure you that the information I put on is absolutely correct and does not create any problems with copyright issues since 95% of that information is public knowledge. If I unederstand it correctly public information like "1968 American moon landing" cannot be a copyright protected information. The information which was put on the ICAS site after my work over at the beginning of the week and which is online now is completely wrong, so I ask you to please not put it online again. I can't correct anything since you blocked me out. Bo1958 ( talk) 11:20, 13 December 2019 (UTC) All the information I put on the website is online at the respective ICAS homepage. So I cannot see any copyright issues. Kind regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bo1958 ( talk • contribs) 11:08, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa, Earwig's Copyvio Detector shows a high probability of potential copyright content in the Andy Gipson article. Regards. Woodlot ( talk) 14:49, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
- FlightTime Phone ( open channel) 00:10, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
pls see Talk:FBI files on Michael Jackson.-- Moxy 🍁 06:40, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa,
How are you? A question when citing AV.
cite AV media |people= |date= |title=|trans-title= |medium= |language= English|url= |access-date= |type= |time= |location= |publisher= |id= |isbn= |oclc= |quote= |ref=
When asked people= do we put the name of the star over the title or the director. For example I did some work on the page of film star Chuck Norris. For 3 of his films I use a package called 5 Film Chuck Norris Collection. For some strange reason there is a romance film in the package with and the fifth one an episode of a Tv show from the 1950s with Charles Bronson.
When I use this package a citation on people I use Norris, since the box set represents his action film persona. Also, to keep it real, I don't want to type all these directors' name. It keeps it simple.
cite AV media|url=|title=5 Film Chuck Norris Collection|date=2013|people=Chuck Norris|type=DVD|language=English|publisher=Echo Bridge Acquisition Corp LLC|trans-title=|location=|time=|access-date=|ref=|id=09600922143|isbn=|oclc=|quote=|medium=
In the case of a film which has actor Stuart Whitman among three other leads who had their names over the title and is not necessarily a signature role I just put the director's name, or many various they're horror sets with over 15 titles.
cite AV media|url=|title=Sandman|date=1997|people=Eric Woster|type=|language=English|publisher=Third Coast Entertainment Inc.|trans-title=|location=Hollywood, California|time=|access-date=|ref=|id=601243601230|oclc=|quote=|medium=VHS
If for some reasons the director's name isn't on the box but would have several stars with their name over the title. I would put all the stars name or any highlighted name which is sometime the cases with producers.
Anyways this how go doing this I either put the most highlighted on the cover or the director when there is several. In the future if I use a box set with over 7 titles I will put various. Let me know if it's ok with you. Filmman3000 ( talk) 07:32, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
|first1=...|last1=...
and so on in the usual way. It's okay to do it as best you can; perfection is not required—
Diannaa 🍁 (
talk) 13:30, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
The two questions that comes to mind are?
In this package The first and second movie have the same director would I have to mention his name twice?
If I wanted to be precise to a section, like one of the specific film include, an audio commentary, a making of, or an interview. Where or what need to be added for a sub section? Filmman3000 ( talk) 23:38, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
| time =
—
Diannaa 🍁 (
talk) 23:45, 16 December 2019 (UTC)Thanks for everything if there's anything I can do to help you personally feel free to ask. Filmman3000 ( talk) 04:16, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
I would greatly appreciate some assistance at National Register of Citizens of India; some of it is obviously a copyright violation, but it's unclear which websites have copied from Wikipedia and which haven't, so I'm unsure how much of the page is a copyright violation; also, I'm INVOLVED on closely related topics, and don't want to take any admin actions that aren't patently obvious. Regards, Vanamonde ( Talk) 10:01, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa. Could you please check the recent changes on this page? Puduḫepa 18:02, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
From /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Non-free_content_criteria
It states: "No free equivalent. Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose."
I underline: "Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available"
Are you sure that I cannot use this review as source?: https://www.thetablet.co.uk/books/10/11298/blame-the-christians
En historiker ( talk) 18:38, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa,
Thanks for the information about copyright and copy/pasting source content. I'll be more careful in the future. Is it possible to see the most recent version before my contributions were removed? I think I can tidy it up and edit it per the copyright guidelines and it would be much faster than trying to find the reports/studies and starting from scratch. I think it's a pretty poor page without the added sections.
Best,
-- Ebenwilliams ( talk) 19:36, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
OK, I'll start again.
Best, -- Ebenwilliams ( talk) 17:37, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
Damon Runyon's short story
"Dancing Dan's Christmas" is a fun read if you have the time. Right from the start it extols the virtues of the
hot Tom and Jerry
No matter what concoction is your favorite to imbibe during this festive season I would like to toast you with it and to thank you for all your work here at the 'pedia this past year. Best wishes for your 2020 as well D. MarnetteD| Talk 23:10, 18 December 2019 (UTC) |
Thank you MarnetteD ~!— Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 00:11, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
I'm sure that there must be a more appropriate way to report copyvios that via your talk page, so please forgive this intrusion.
Regards -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 14:19, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi, Despite your previous warning, there seems to have been a further copy and paste in the article Nordic Model approach to prostitution. Please see dif and Does decriminalising pimping further women’s rights?. Regards -- John B123 ( talk) 22:57, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
Edit to add [16] and Real change for aboriginal women begins with the end of prostitution. -- John B123 ( talk) 23:23, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
Io, Saturnalia! | |
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:25, 20 December 2019 (UTC) |
Hi Diannaa - You've deleted my update to Akhilesh Reddy due to 'unsourced additions.' Can you give me some pointers on this? The MPTS have suspended this physician for nine months as he was claiming a double academic salary. This information is in the public domain through the MPTS website. Do I need to include a link to the page that states this? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MargotLeadbetter ( talk • contribs) 16:26, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Thank you~!— Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 19:36, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Right away. ZarhanFastfire ( talk) 19:35, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
ZarhanFastfire ( talk) 19:39, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Dear Diannaa:
You have raised potential plagiarism issues about my additions to Park Seung's page. I wrote all this update myself based on dialogues with Mr. Park and his biography written in Korean. I am his son and it is natural for me to have an intimate knowledge about his life and career. I did not copy anything in making these additions.
Also, you said the file I had uploaded(Seungpark2002.jpg) was missing permission information. Mr. Park owns the photo which he gave me so to add to his wikipedia page. There is no copyright problem whatsoever.
Please do not delete my additions and the photo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goyejoo ( talk • contribs) 01:38, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2020! |
Hello Diannaa, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this
seasonal occasion. Spread the
WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2020. Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
Thank you Star Trekker~!— 🎄 Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 15:38, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
Luke Jerram ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
In May 2018 you sorted out copyright problems on this article, however it was added back by the same IP in June 2018. Thank you. FDW777 ( talk) 15:43, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
Sweet Brown Snail by
Jason Rhoades and
Paul McCarthy
|
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Thank you for all your edits and contributions this year.
Wishing you a happy holiday! ThatMontrealIP ( talk) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ |
Hello Diannaa, thanks for your edit and the detailed message. Wishing you a happy holiday and many more fruitful contributions for the new year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anthony Baratier ( talk • contribs) 18:19, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for your first edit. I admit to being lazy, cutting and pasting from a source; and I generally go back and paraphrase. However, your edit changing "heat, dust and sunshine" to "elements" is misleading, since it is the specific elements listed that make the clothes necessary. I cannot think of any alternative wording to accurately convey the meaning. I could say Desert climate, but that is also too general. People in the Middle East adopted clothing that is essentially a portable tent because of the particular combination of conditions they faced.-- WriterArtistDC ( talk) 19:59, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
I have reworded again, with less clarity, by referencing "cooling by evaporation" and dust storms, which others might call a personal interpretation of the source. In ~13 years of editing, I have never encountered this strict interpretation of copyright policy.-- WriterArtistDC ( talk) 03:20, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
Another copyvio by Rowan Forest (former BatteryIncluded) in First observation of gravitational waves, reported at Talk:Circumstellar habitable zone/Archive 1#Violation of copyright laws, I'm afraid.
See the second paragraph of UniverseToday.com's article and compare with Special:Diff/705815813/705821268 (edit by BatteryIncluded at 19:25, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
— ProfessorPine, 08:05, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
Time for a WP:CCI, do you agree? (I will do it next week, if you do). It is sad to see an apparently respected contributor make so basic an error of judgement.-- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 11:25, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank you!— 🎄 Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 22:17, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
Have a WikiChristmas and a PediaNewYear |
Be well. Keep well. Have a lovely Christmas. SilkTork ( talk) 10:05, 24 December 2019 (UTC) |
![]() |
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2020! |
Hello Diannaa, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this
seasonal occasion. Spread the
WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2020. Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
Thank you! Best wishes for the holidays!— 🎄 Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 19:21, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I see you removed some material added by User:Greghenderson2006 to Pet, No. 9 and Alexander D. Henderson Jr.. He has emailed OTRS agreeing to CC-license his book; I see the book itself also says it's CC-licensed on its first page.
So what should be done about that? I realize there may also be notability and original research concerns, particularly for the boat. — Emufarmers( T/ C) 00:12, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
Miraclepine wishes you a Merry Christmas, a Happy New Year, and a prosperous decade of change and fortune.
この
ミラ
PはDiannaaたちのメリークリスマスも新年も変革と幸運の豊かな十年をおめでとうございます!
フレフレ、みんなの未来!/GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR FUTURE!
ミラ
P 03:15, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi, have removed some copyvio from this page, could you please give it another check, regards Atlantic306 ( talk) 05:39, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa. Would you mind taking a look at Tony Hoagland#From JET (published in Donkey Gospel, 1998). It looks like it's the first stanza from this poem. There's really no sourced critical commentary of it though per WP:NFC#CS so it might be pretty hard to justify if it needed to be treated as non-free content even as a representative example of Hoagland's work since there's nothing about the poem itself per se such as whether it won a awards or is the poet's best known work, etc. anywhere else in the article. Not sure if a stanza of a poem, even formatted as a block quote, is also OK per WP:COPY. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 13:33, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
Hello! We have been having a COIN discussion about User:Biografer. The editor is a prolific creator of new bios. One of their articles was reported for COI but on further inspection we discovered that the user creates many, many articles that are thin paraphrases of medical journal bios and the like. Christian Borgemeister is a very recent example. Earwig shows it at 35%. This is after being warned at COIN by an admin not to copyvio anything. A few days ago they created Rodney L. Belcher, which comes in at 55.4% on Earwig. Granted, many of the detected items are standard hospital names and the like. But there is direct, albeit minor copying. Biografer's response in the thread was to say that he understands copyvio and that " I think that as long as the copyvio is not above 50% it should be fine." Is it acceptable, or should we take this to ANI... or do you have any suggestions? ThatMontrealIP ( talk) 21:30, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi Diaana,
I have done recent work on both Bruce Lee (a bit) and his son Brandon Lee (a lot) pages.
A recurring that thing I read about while researching is something known as The Bruce Lee curse, a superstition along the line that every first male of the family will die a tragic death. Published rumors that it was the mafia who killed them, and all kinds of weird stuff.
It is not a subject I am comfortable with, and I will not over elaborate the conspiracy theories of their death on their pages. Even if these conspiracies are widely published.
The sad thing is that the so called Bruce Lee curse is notable enough to have its own page. And I think it is unavoidable to skip it on both their pages.
I have brought this to the attention of WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers, but the topic didn't gained traction. Since I intent to pursue the Brandon Lee article and it is not as central to him compared to his father, I think it needs to be said in passing.
Regarding Bruce Lee's death rumors, I wan't to note that I will not pursue on his page, unless one day (not the near future) I feel I can engage about this properly, nor will ever create a page about that.
Anyways between these two sentences about his passing I will add the following.
Attempts to save him were unsuccessful, and Lee was pronounced dead on March 31, 1993 at 1:03 pm. EST. He was 28 years old. The shooting was ruled an accident due to negligence.
Attempts to save him were unsuccessful, and Lee was pronounced dead on March 31, 1993 at 1:03 pm. EST. He was 28 years old. An investigation took place. It resurrected decades old rumours liking it to his father's death. The final ruling was an accident due to negligence on set.
I feel that the Brandon Lee article is my first significant collaboration to Wikipidia. I cited his whole career, most of the other sections are complete aside from martial arts and legacy. This is the only aspect of his life I will report before publishing, I do not think there is much elaboration beyond that but if there is and you don't mind... I will pass it by you. Filmman3000 ( talk) 05:36, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa,
I am attempting to edit, so as to highlight/elevate notability of Animus Theatre Company but am encountering some difficulties, and your editing prowess is impressive. Are your notes simply meant to imply that I re-submit edits/copy in a different format? ( ShoeSchool420 ( talk) 19:37, 28 December 2019 (UTC))
Thank you for your prompt reply. The speedy deletion has been contested in detail as notability has been detailed in comparison to similar organizations. Any advice you might offer as to possible additional information to include would be helpful. If conflicts of interest are avoided, can the copyright issues be specified so they might be rectified? Many thanks. ( ShoeSchool420 ( talk) 20:06, 28 December 2019 (UTC))
Hello, and sorry to be a bother, but it seems that a lot of the portugese election articles, under their Electoral system section have a great amount of content that appears to be copied from http://electionresources.org/pt/index_en.html#SYSTEM. The URL was online with that content at least in 2006, which is earlier than I can trace any of the offending articles. Thoughts? Eddie891 Talk Work 14:14, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
RevisionDelete is mainly intended for simple use and fairly recent material. Text that exists in numerous revisions (e.g. on busy pages) or which has been the subject of many others' comments may not be practical to redact. Redaction of such material should take into account how practical and effective redaction will be, how disruptive it would be (e.g. to others' valid posts), and whether redaction will itself draw attention to the issue. No hard line exists; judgment is required. Administrators in this situation may wish to initially edit the page to revert or remove the grossly improper material, and then consult.There is a blatant misjudgment in such a large scale application of WP:REVDEL. Impru20 talk 18:07, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
Redaction of such material should take into account how practical and effective redaction will be, how disruptive it would be (e.g. to others' valid posts), and whether redaction will itself draw attention to the issue.It would be nice to see your judgement on where and when did you take this into account before asking for a second opinion. Otherwise, it would not be a "second" but just a "first" opinion what I should get. If REVDEL intends for attention not to be drawn to the issue, you may have achieved the exact opposite. It is nigh to impossible for someone not to notice 400 revisions being entirely revdeled, when the affected content was in fact only added in one or two of these. Impru20 talk 18:32, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa - a user has added content copied from
this site (without proper attribution). The website does have a note saying "All copy within Programme Information can be used free of charge on condition that it credits the relevant BBC programme or service
" at the top of the page - would this be sufficient to allow us to copy from it, if the user were to add a citation and attribution template to the article? Or, is this inadequate for our purposes, and should the content be removed and revdelled? Thanks in advance
GirthSummit
(blether) 17:19, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa. I wonder could you have a quick look as User talk:Charlton Malinga? Many thanks. Martinevans123 ( talk) 18:57, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa. Just making you aware of WP:MCQ#PartridgeMural.jpg in case you weren't already. Please correct any mistaken advice I might've given the uploader of this file. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 21:48, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi there. You removed a recent addition regarding dance. You said it was copied from somewhere but couldn't find the source. That puzzled me and thought I would check why you knew it was copied, if you couldn't locate that? It seemed to me like a useful addition. hamiltonstone ( talk) 02:30, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi
Why are you reviewing / editing a draft page?.... Its not complete and therefore not ready for review - I'm well aware I've cut & pasted some information ... I assume that's how the whole of history works (referencing work that's come before) ... by the time I've completed the editing it will be in my words
Andy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrewwise ( talk • contribs) 09:41, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa, How are you ? :) this is Sai Raghavendra Puranam aka Raghusri, can you please protect this film artcile Sarileru Neekevvaru temporarily why because some un-necessary edits by some non registered users and moreover as the film relase date is nearing vandalism also increases day by day, so that my humble request to you is : please protect the above film artcile temporarily till 31 January 2020. Thank you :) Sai Raghavendra Puranam 11:12, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
I rolled back a series of edit including one copied from this source
I have seen copyright issues with World Bank documents before, and I've always been mildly surprised that the World Bank doesn't make their material open source. In this particular case, the document had the following statement:
It is part of a larger effort by the World Bank to provide open access to its research and make a contribution to development policy discussions around the world. (emphasis added)
I wondered if this was an exception to their practice or a change in practice. However, despite the reference to "open source", I didn't see specific wording with an acceptable cc license. Furthermore, the document identifies that it can be found at this site which contains a clear copyright statement bottom of the page. That said, I've seen situations where there is a formulaic copyright statement at the bottom of a page, and that page contains content which itself may be differently licensed.
I think I'm on solid ground arguing that this particular source is not clearly licensed in a way that we can use it but I thought I'd run it by you as well.-- S Philbrick (Talk) 13:11, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Draft:Saltatory pattern of fetal heart rate. I do not think that Draft:Saltatory pattern of fetal heart rate fits any of the speedy deletion criteria because I am not seeing more than brief factual phrases common to the listed sites and the draft. I request that you consider not re-tagging Draft:Saltatory pattern of fetal heart rate for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. DES (talk) DESiegel Contribs 18:52, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
I know that you are experienced in copyright matters, and perhaps there is something that I am not seeing here. I did mark the formal definition as a quotation. Is there more that is needed here, in your view. DES (talk) DESiegel Contribs 18:52, 30 December 2019 (UTC)